Ingle at AC Party: Time for Corzine to step aside?

Bob Ingle just wrote an interesting article based on his recent visit to the League of Municipalities Annual conference in Atlantic City.

Some Democrats are privately asking if it wouldn't be in the best interest of the party if Gov. Jon S. Corzine moved on instead of seeking another term. That mirrors what a recent poll showed — more than half the voters think Corzine doesn't deserve re-election.

The scuttlebutt is apparently that NJ politicians have had enough with a Governor that brought a resume heavy with Wall Street business experience and then applied none of it to the problems of the state. Although, with all candor, the Wall Street resume doesn't exactly bring much confidence to anyone these days and maybe New Jersey just got a sneak preview of how pathetic management of these firms truly has been.

I had a disturbing thought when reading the following section of the article:

It's clear those unnamed Democrats who claimed in published reports Corzine's name was on a short list of possible Treasury secretary nominees were not exactly informed sources. Maybe something like an ambassadorship to Chad will surface or something less hefty than the Cabinet he can use to save face. If so, who would the Democrats put up to succeed him?

Go back to the NJLM meeting for a clue. Two potential candidates, Senate President Richard Codey and Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney, had huge parties — at the same time but different places. Unlike in past such soirees when he sat around and chatted with the party faithful, Codey was making the rounds, glad-handing folks.

Sweeney's party was better attended. Sweeney greeted arrivals and said goodbye to the departing. At the door, they were collecting names and e-mail addresses.

Why is there another government party going on in Atlantic City? While the league performs an admirable job providing information to members of municipal governments, I wonder about the wisdom of "partying in AC" while we are in the midst of the worst financial crisis in 30 years. And this is while New Jersey is readying itself to go cup in hand to Washington to bail it out. Yes, the same people partying with Codey are the same ones who put New Jersey in this mess to begin with. And I bet you they didn't miss their tee times.

Read the entire article here.

---

Forbes: NJ begging for help for bad budget behavior

Forbes had an excellent article today about state governments going hat in hand to Washington to beg for relief for their bad practices in budgeting and spending.

Subsidies, whether broad or targeted, do not deliver recovery. They veil bad behavior and poor financial decisions, while encouraging more of the same--leaving the underlying causes for failure to fester. And once aid is handed out, it is hard to know when to stop. That's the Samaritan's Dilemma: when the expectation of subsidies leads to increased dependency upon them. Aid begets more aid.

The reality of this situation is that New Jersey, New York and California were is major trouble BEFORE the current business collapse. The real issue is that they all have liberal (Republican and Democrat) legislatures that can't wait to find something to throw money at or tax. And then, when a serious problem occurs, they are not prepared in any way shape or form. And here is the kicker that we at njtaxrevolution said all along:

Bad habits also persist. Gov. Jon Corzine of New Jersey found $600 million in cuts this June, only to borrow $3.9 billion for school construction projects, with another bond issue of $750 million for transportation projects underway.

This is like my wife and I deciding to tighten the belt and cutting spending on presents for the kids this Christmas. And then borrowing for a new pool, a new car and our next vacation. When will the people of this state wake up?

Read the entire article here.

---

Hey...Where's my bailout?

As I watch the steady progression of business people march on Washington to apply for their bailout, I am starting to really question my own sanity. For example, we have had:

1. Investment banks
2. Insurance companies
3. Mortgage banks
4. Auto companies
5. States

And they have all lined up at the trough to get money from....you and me.

Well, I work plenty of hours a week. I am a platinum traveller in my job. I pay my bills including my mortgage and didn't take a loan I couldn't afford. My financial wellbeing has been damaged by:

1. Politicians in congress like Barney Frank and Chris Dodd who wanted people who could not afford houses to get loans they couldn't afford.
2. Barney Frank having a "personal" relationship with an executive that completely screwed the taxpayer....(I will reisist the rest)
3. A market that has now collapsed and sent my 401k through the floor

Where is my bailout? Better be careful congress. It is almost time for pitchforks and fire.

---

Charlie Rangel has done it again. Taxes for you but not for him!

The New York Post has once again caught Charlie Rangel playing tax games on residences. You may recall the scandal before the election about Rangel's vacation residence in the Dominican Republic that he didn't bother to declared on his tax return. Or his use of two rent stabilized apartments for himself and his campaign offices. And now this:

Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel took a "homestead" tax break on a Washington, DC, house for years while simultaneously occupying multiple rent-stabilized apartments in New York City, possibly violating laws and regulations in both cases.

You may ask, what is wrong with that?

The situation raises a number of potential problems for the congressman, including:

* New York City law requires that tenants use rent-stabilized apartments as their primary residence.

* DC's real Property Homestead Deduction Act also requires that a property receiving the benefit be a primary residence.

* Tax lawyers told The Post that a property owner cannot have two primary residences - or take advantages provided to primary residences at two different addresses simultaneously.

* DC's law also requires that the owner of a property benefiting from the tax break be a personal-income taxpayer in DC. District law exempts members of Congress from paying personal DC income tax, but they must pay property tax.

The real issue is so much deeper than this newly reported story. This mean is Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. This committee is responsible for setting tax policy. And this is the third time in three months that Charlie Rangel has had serious allegations brought up accusing him of at least an ethical violation and at worst a crime. If it were you or I, we would be in handcuffs.

And worse than this, Nancy Pelosi has not seen fit to even reprimand Rangel. It is frankly the kind of corruption the Democrats have perpetuated for some time with a public too dense to hold them to account. Rangel has crossed the line and is actively subverting exactly the tax policy he wants applied to you. He is a criminal.

Read the entire Post story here.

---

NJ Supreme Court considering wants higher taxes!

Once again the NJ Supreme Court, an entity that reports to no one and is filled with partisan political appointee (by definition) has decided to review whether or not recent developments with the budget need tinkering(from Philly.com):

If New Jersey wants the state's highest court to approve its new formula for funding its schools, the state needs to show that it is providing sufficient resources for its poorest districts, according to a ruling released yesterday.

The New Jersey Supreme Court ordered fact-finding hearings on the state's new education-funding formula before the justices will rule on whether it should permanently replace the old system that favored certain largely poor, urban school districts.

What is incredible about this interference on reasonable legislative change, is that NJ spending for poor districts is already in the top 5 of all states. So if the Supreme Court wants to get involved, they clearly want to promote further a concerted attack on the working class family in this state through higher taxes. It gets a little disgusting when "poor districts" in this state continue to plead for more money when every other district than a "poor district" (or Abbott district by definition from the court) have to raise taxes on a yearly basis to just keep up while the state robs money to pay for corruption in the Abbott districts.

At the current rate, we will all represent Abbott districts and the Supreme Court can dictate that we all need more money. No matter what happens, this state will sooner or later realize that this group of political hacks should not continue to undermine our legislature and voters. We have a tricameral government for a reason. And it isn't to enrich corruption.

---

Chris Christie has resigned. Democrats breath a sigh of relief.

From the Wall Street Journal:

Two down, one to go? New Jersey U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie has announced his resignation, effective Dec. 1, after nearly seven years at the office.

It's a sad day when the state of New Jersey loses the only adult fighting corruption on behalf of taxpayers. Christie has successfully prosecuted 130 public corruption cases without an acquittal. He will be missed as I guarantee you he will be replaced by a lightweight who will make the NJ Attorney General look like...well...another lightweight attorney. Sad but true.

Here is hoping that Christie will run for Governor.

---

Corrupt Camden Pol Sloan El has a plan to head the Democratic Party

I was shocked to read today about a former Camden City Councilman who was sent to prison for corruption. What did he do(from AP)?

Former Camden City Councilman Ali Sloan El is out of prison after serving 15 months in federal prison.

Sloan El was sentenced to 20 months after he was convicted of taking $36,000 in bribes from an FBI agent two years ago.

The AP story goes on to say how the poor politician found his incarceration to be less than a country club:

Sloan El says the minimum security prison in South Carolina where he served his time had "terrible food, terrible library, terrible health care, no gym and a tyrant in charge."

I suppose we are all supposed to pity a politician who abuses the public trust and actually gets caught and has to pay the price. But this is New Jersey after all and Mr Sloan isn't going to let a felony corruption conviction hold him back. While he can't hold office, he can sure do something else for the Democratic Party:

Sloan El, who is barred from elected office, says he hopes to head Camden's Democratic Party within three years.

And you know what? I bet he actually does. And noone will think that anything is wrong with that.

---

Wayne Bryant - The NJ Democrat Culture of Corruption Marches On

Former State Senator and power broker in South Jersey politics Wayne Bryant rested his defense in his corruption trial yesterday(From the Courierpostonline):

In closing arguments, the attorneys attacked the prosecution's case as an overzealous concoction, a blend of "innuendo, spin and interpretation," in the words of Bryant attorney Carl Poplar, emanating from what he called a "nasty investigation."

"They have accused, alleged and asserted," Poplar said of the prosecution team from the office of the U.S. attorney for New Jersey. "But they have not proven that a single crime was committed, much less that Wayne Bryant committed any."

The entire case apparently is about perception according to the defense. But across the river, there is another Democrat politician being prosecuted for corruption for the "perception" that he strong armed donors to maintain his shore house, give him gifts and prop up his lifestyle. For if you accept the "perception" defense, anything goes if you believe that you are "entitled" to receive taxpayer money for doing nothing.

Here are the facts of the case:

1. The Wayne Bryan strong armed the College of Medicine and Dentistry to give him a $35,000 a year job. In essence, he suggested that the Dean of the school Michael Gallagher that we would allowed him to pad his salary in return for the bribe of a job.
2. This would be a job he very rarely showed up for nor did he show any interest in the school when he was there.
3. He used his chairmanship of the Senator Budget committee to funnel in excess of 10 million dollars of taxpayer funds to the school during 2003 through 2006.
4. He engaged in a pension padding scheme to bolster his pension by having others do his legal work while he did nothing.

You can view the full indictment here.

The defense was simple. Everyone does it so it is okay.

---

Conservatives and the 2008 elections

Here I sit in a town that is not my own reading a slew of drivel about what conservatives should take out of this past election. Since I live in New Jersey, I have heard all of these arguments before because alleged conservatives are an extinct species in NJ. But that isn't really the problem. New Jersey is exactly the model that national conservatives should shun when mapping a strategy forward. Why?

1. In New Jersey, unless a Republican (the closest thing we have to a conservative) agrees with abortion, there is a high degree of probability that the political machines will squash them out of the gate. And God forbid, they get the nomination. Google Brent Schundler to get the details on that. He lost through friendly fire before he ever competed. Abortion is an issue. Maybe to me it is important and to others less important. This needs to stop being a wedge issue among conservatives. And it needs to stop being a disqualifying issue among moderates when competing against conservatives in the party.

2. Many have argued that conservatives need to move to the middle because their beliefs don't match the electorate. This one is interesting. Barack Obama won with a solid margin. But defense of marriage won big in every election where it was on the ballot. This is not exactly a mandate against conservatism. It is as I have blogged before a great sign of voters breaking out of formerly lock-step mentality.

3. Conservative ideas don't work and need to be more liberal. How would you know in NJ or in the country? There has not been a conservative influence in our state in 40 years. And when Republicans got control of the federal government, they let down their core constituency by quickly learning to spend just like their Democrat friends. What does that prove? That Trenton and Washington corrupts and conservatives let us down.

4. Once voters believe it doesn't matter, you lose. For example, George W Bush reduced taxes by significant margins at every level. In return, states like New Jersey immediately sucked up the reduction with increases with no explanation. As a matter of fact, our corrupt governor (who became our corrupt gay governor to avoid prosecution) somehow managed to increase taxes, spending, borrowing and corruption without any media attention paid. And now NJ residents believe that "it doesn't matter who is in charge, taxes will go up".

The net for conservatives and Republicans is that we need to take a position that we stand for something. Anything. If Republicans like the former Chris Shays of CT win and we become warmed over Democrats, fine. At least the party will stand for SOMETHING. Right now, the brand is tarnished by the war, tarnished by a congress that would not hold true to its principals and catered to a pack of politicians that espoused conservative and Republican principles only when convenient but never in practice.

Time to stand up for something, anything, please....

---

Verizon Stays With Tax Breaks

In this article at NJBiz.com, reporter Evelyn Lee discusses Verizon's decision to stay in Newark.

The New Jersey Economic Development Authority announced late last month that Verizon would be the first company to receive tax credits under the [Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit] program, which Gov. Jon S. Corzine created in January to boost private investment and create job growth in urban centers. The corporation will receive tax credits of about $2 million annually for 10 years to invest more than $25 million and employ more than 700 people at its Newark headquarters at 540 Broad St., according to the EDA.

700 people employed in downtown Newark. Say they average $30,000 each in annual salary. That yields 21 million dollars annually flowing into Newark.

That money is multiplied by the fact that these employees buy stuff, rent apartments, and, yes, pay taxes.

It's also multipled by the money Verizon will pay to Social Security, to their landlords (a 10-year lease to Accordia Realty Ventures), in property taxes ($4.2 million in 2007, though perhaps that's less under this plan), to the power company, and so on.

It's multiplied by the expenditures of businesspeople, like the cab rides they'll take between the airport and the Newark office -- and the money the cab drivers will spend on food, clothing, shelter, and luxuries as well, and get taxed on those items, too.

I don't know whether the $25 million is on top of that or a part of that, so I'll ignore it for now.

In short, that $2 million in annual "corporate welfare"* will have a return on investment of 1000+% to the state in salaries alone, and probably more like 2000-3000% when you add in all of the multipliers.

Do you want to know what an investment of $2 million in additional welfare payments would be? About $600,000 in government overhead (maybe 20 jobs) and 1.4 million in payments (call it $20K each to 70 people) to demoralized people who have a hard time finding work.

Some people are complaining because in the current economic climate Verizon might have decided not to move. Don't let them fool you. During an economic crisis, companies love to cut costs, and other parts of the state would be happy to find a company that would bring them 700 jobs. The investment in moving isn't risky for Verizon.

And even if they would have stayed without the cuts, isn't the Return on Investment high enough to want to make sure?

And if it's good for the state to let Verizon keep more of its money, wouldn't it be good to do that for more businesses?

This story isn't about Verizon at all. It's about Newark, and New Jersey, and the benefits of letting businesses keep more of the money that they earn. It's about lower taxes and their economic benefit.

Governor Corzine, you don't need a special program to get these benefits. Just cut the corporate tax rates and keep them low.

-----

* Of course, "corporate welfare" is an Orwellian term in situations like this. This form of "corporate welfare" is really just letting a business keep more of the money it makes. Nancy Pelosi asking the Treasury to help Chrysler is "corporate welfare": they're not taking in enough money to pay their bills, so the government helps them out. Of course, we call that a "bailout". Maybe we should start calling welfare programs "personal bailout" programs...

---

When It Absolutely, Positively Has To Be Destroyed Overnight

Yes, I know this isn't tax-related, or New Jersey orientated [that was deliberate], but I'm going to say it anyway.

I was an active duty Marine officer from 1992 through 1995. This weekend, I went on a Boy Scout trip to Washington DC, and one of the stops was the recently-built National Museum of the Marine Corps in Triangle, VA, just outside of Quantico. If you ever want to feel like a total wuss, go there. I was in the Marines, and I'm too soft for those guys.

My favorite quote, engraved on the wall, was said by Army Major General Frank E. Lowe in 1952: "The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. Lord, how they could fight!"

Anyway, today is the 233rd birthday of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children. Here's the Commandant's message (link in PDF). Happy Birthday, Marines, and God bless those of you overseas especially.

---

Sarah Palin. And McCain's lack of class!

John McCain was always ready to decry any untoward criticism of Barack Obama and he should have been. It is the right thing to do when valid. But now, when Sarah Palin is under attack from his disloyal political hacks, he is completely silent. It is sad in a way because it shows that he is now done with conservatives and is more than happy to put them back under the bus where he feels they belong. But his crew still needs to get past the "facts". This is from the Corner on National Review:

Palin and Africa, Etc. [Rich Lowry]


I talked to Steve Biegun, the former Bush NSC aid who briefed Sarah Palin on foreign policy, and he considers the leaks against her on the international stuff "absurd."

He says there's no way she didn't know Africa was a continent, and whoever is saying she didn't must be distorting "a fumble of words." He talked to her about all manner of issues relating to Africa, from failed states to the Sudan. She was aware from the beginning of the conflict in Darfur, which is followed closely in evangelical churches, and was aware of Clinton's AIDS initiative. That basically makes it impossible that she thought all of Africa was a country.

On not knowing what countries are in NAFTA, Biegun was part of the conversation that led to that accusation and it convinces him "somebody is acting with a high degree of maliciousness." He was briefing Palin before a Univision interview, and talking to her about trade issues. He rolled through NAFTA, CAFTA, and the Colombia FTA. As he talked, people were coming in and out of the room, handing Palin things, etc. She was distracted from what Biegun was saying, and said, roughly, "Ok, who's in NAFTA, what's the deal with CAFTA, what's up the FTA?"—her way, Biegun says, of saying "rack them and stack them," begin again from the start. "Somebody is taking a conversation and twisting it maliciously," he says.

In general, according to Beigun, Palin had a steep learning curve on foreign issues, about what you would expect from a governor. But she has "great instincts and great core values," and is "an instinctive internationalist." The stories against her are being "fed by an unnamed source who is allowed by the press to make ad hominem attacks on background." Biegun, who spent dozens and dozens of hours briefing Palin on these issues, is happy to defend her, on the record, under his own name.

The entire article is here.

Mr McCain. Will you finally disavow the comments of your hacks? Or will you just let silence make your case. This situation has made me realized that Barack Obama and his organization has far outclassed the McCain organization and how wrong these people are both for Sarah Palin and for our country.

---

Mr Obama - For our country, please don't choose Corzine

President-elect Obama used our governor at the latter stages of this campaign on the economic issue. We can all debate that as a wise strategy but now that he has won, it probably has no significance. But Barack Obama needs to understand what New Jersey residents both Democrat and Republican already know. Jon Corzine is a complete lightweight. He came into this state with a lot of promise due to his economic experience. And all we got was "I don't want to be Scrooge".

It highlighted his cowardice and lack of vision in a big way. We are stuck with him. Our country is not. President-elect Obama, while my instinct is to play Corzine up as a winner to get him out of New Jersey, my concern for the country in this difficult time is far more important. We need a heavy hitter. And Corzine is so much balsawood.

---

California Proposition 8 Fallout

An interesting thing happened on the way to Barack Obama's historic victory on Tuesday. In several states, there were ballot initiatives attempting to establish standards for marriage definition as between a man and woman. The marquis battle this election occurred in California. This was a state that supported the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. Judges overturned the people's feelings on that matter. And the people overturned the judges.

The turnout included a tremendous growth of blacks who voted in favor of Barack Obama and why wouldn't they. He ran an excellent campaign and was clearly the better man in this election (despite my own preference). But for the first time in a long time, black voters really showed that they are not single issue lock-step Democrats(From the La Times):

Although many of the state's black political leaders spoke out against Proposition 8, an exit poll of California voters showed that black voters favored the measure by a ratio of more than 2 to 1. Not only was the black vote weighted heavily in favor of Proposition 8, but black turnout -- spurred by Barack Obama's historic campaign for president -- was unusually large, with African Americans making up roughly 10% of the state electorate.

The exit poll didn't ask voters why they voted the way they did. But Madison Shockley, pastor of Pilgrim United Church of Christ in Carlsbad and among the roughly one-third of blacks who opposed Proposition 8, said the vote was understandable. "Black folks go to church, probably more than the Caucasian population, and the churches they go to tend to be very traditional."

This is a big moment. I think there is also opportunity in this for conservatives as many black voters have far more traditional values than is portrayed by the media or liberal activists. And they proved it this year. And more power to them and to other groups that stop voting for things that they really don't believe in. I think that Barack Obama may really mature the electorate in many ways. As we get past simpleminded allegiances and examine issues (all of us, black, white, asian, union, hispanic, business etc), we will all make better electoral decisions.

The tantrum protests around Prop 8 in California remind me of something that I would prefer to forget. That the most racist person I have ever known was a liberal black woman. And the most intolerant person I have ever known was gay. For you see, labels are never exactly as they seem. And the current news cycle is proving at least the latter as true. And the former would frankly look silly in today's world.

And thank God for that.

---

Now Palin gets it from "friendly" fire.

We just finished a historic election. John McCain literally got his clock cleaned by a better run and better financed operation. And McCain's staff clowns have now decided to go after Sarah Palin. Michelle Malkin has the story here.

But the real issue is that a pack of losers who let down John McCain are now telling stories behind the scenes to media outlets to trash Sarah Palin. And many outlets are trying to blame Palin for McCain's loss.

Here is the deal.

1. Sarah Palin was the only breath of life in McCain's pathetic campaign.
2. Palin absorbed more garbage than any politician I have seen in my adult life. And yet she showed class and calm through it all.
3. McCain was incoherent and frankly never really made the case for himself.
4. McCain's staff should go down in history as the most disorganized, disloyal and incompetent in the history of Presidential campaigns.
5. McCain's crew speaking out of school is frankly poetic justice. While I supported him, I am now glad he did not win if this is the kind of people he has put in positions of authority.
6. If McCain doesn't come out and tell these people to grow up, it will say a lot.
7. Honor applies to politics as well as the military.

---

Congratulations President-elect Obama

Sorry for the late post but I have been travelling for work. Last night I spent the election in Arlington, Virginia watching the results at a local watering hole. The interesting thing is that the place we selected was clearly biased one way (here is a hint-all tv's were on MSNBC). But it was pretty upbeat and not negative in any way. After we headed back to the hotel to have a cigar outside, we knew the night was over for McCain when we heard Taps being played, likely from Arlington National Cemetary although I couldn't be sure (but I am sure it was Taps).

And the funny thing is that even though I didn't vote for Barack Obama, I wasn't completely devastated. Last night was history and I have to give Obama credit for an almost flawless campaign and he is now our President. And I will respect him as the keeper of that office. Congratulations to him and to our country for a great fight!

Also, I think that conservatives should now show Democrats how one should act in defeat. I am old enough to recognize that there are ebbs and flows. But do you notice that noone on the Republican side threatened to leave the country, noone has expressed Obama derangement syndrome. We all watched the night, were sad to see our guy not make it and move on. Well done all.

---

Ballot Question 1 - It's a scam

Today, voters will go to the polls in New Jersey to elect a President, House member, Senator and various local offices. Also on the ballot are two questions. Ballot question number 2 is pretty straightforward. The current method of selecting judges for municipalities is set forth in the state constitution. However, this causes a problem when judges are appointed across multiple boundaries or multiple jurisdictions. The amendment allows that the legislature can clean this up by status, which is an inherently more flexible alternative than handling this in the constitution.

Question number 1 is more problematic. It purports to be an amendment that would force politicians to put major borrowing decisions to the voters (which last time I checked, the state constitution already mandates). But apparently, there are some major loopholes put into the legislation that would allow Corzine and others to completely circumvent the voter. Americans for prosperity detail the question here with red outline on the loophole in question.

And there is more(from Americans for Prosperity):

But here is the real kicker: "No voter approval shall be required . . . authorizing the creation of . . . debts . . . for the refinancing of all or a portion of any outstanding debts or liabilities of . . . an autonomous public corporate entity."

Our Supreme Court ruled that New Jersey voters don't have to pay a dime on any of the $29 billion previously borrowed by shell entities like the EDA-unless they vote to do it. But with a "Yes" vote on Ballot Question #1, Governor Corzine and the State Legislature could pass a simple law to refinance every dollar of the $37 billion borrowed by state authorities

So, in essence, this question pretends to put debt to the voter but really eliminates the current constitutional ban of bypassing the voter. I am voting NO on question 1.

---

Corzine: "We're going to fight to hold our education funding"

Thank you, Jon Corzine! Even when times are tough, we should avoid reducing our expenditures on education.

Except he's playing the typical bureaucratic trick: the fight to hold our education funding is actually a fight to expand it by a third of a billion dollars.

Budget troubles endanger $350M preschool plan
Delaying expansion of programs would be last resort, Corzine says
Thursday, October 30, 2008
BY DUNSTAN McNICHOL
Star-Ledger Staff

Mounting state budget troubles may force New Jersey to delay plans for a $350 million expansion of public preschool programs, but such a move would be a last resort, Gov. Jon Corzine told a convention of school board members yesterday.

"We're going to fight to hold our education funding," Corzine told about 500 delegates at the New Jersey School Boards Association's annual workshop in Atlantic City. "That doesn't mean there won't be any cuts. That doesn't mean there won't be any freezes. But it means it will be the last thing on the table."

This is just another example of the Nanny State -- literally, in this case -- expanding even in the face of catastrophic fiscal burdens in the state.

"But wait," you say, "I thought we had to fund pre-K programs for needy students."

You're right, we do, because of Abbot v. Burke. But this gluttonous expansion isn't part of that ruling:

Part of the new school funding formula enacted last year, Corzine's plan would be the state's biggest expansion of preschool for low-income students since the state Supreme Court's Abbott vs. Burke rulings, which ordered universal pre-kindergarten in 31 of the poorest districts.

The plan would take the court rulings a step further and order similar preschool for all low-income students, wherever they live. Depending on the numbers, districts would be required to establish the preschool themselves or contract with outside centers to provide the service for eligible students. The state would pay the tab and estimated 17,000 more students would be served as the program is phased in over six years at an eventual cost of $350 million. [Emphasis added.]

So this isn't court-mandated, it's a Corzine pet project.

Jon Corzine wants to add $350,000,000 in spending. Not expanding the budget will be the last thing on the table.

My jaw drops. It makes me wonder what it's like to be inside Corzine's head.

Well, let me try. He thinks that higher tolls will solve budgetary problems, right? So maybe I should think of it this way: It currently costs $6.45 to go from exit 18W to exit 1 on the Turnpike, so we're talking about 54,263,566 trips down the whole length of the Turnpike. Since we're already using all of the current money from the Turnpike, we'd have to increase the number of trips on the Turnpike by that much.

Somehow I don't feel better.

But I'm still not thinking enough like Corzine. After all, he wants to octuple our tolls. If he did that, each trip would cost $51.60, which would only be 6,782,946 trips.

Now that's a much smaller number. What a relief! And since he'd be forcing most people off of the Turnpike and Parkway, we'd see a massive improvement in our statewide carbon footprint, too! See? Win/win!

I'm trying, people, but I still don't see how he forces himself to ignore the fact that increasing the price of using the Turnpike will reduce peoples' willingness to use it. How does he ignore basic laws of supply and demand?

His mind must be the opposite of his budget: flexible, focused, and disciplined.

My own school superintendent gets mentioned in the piece, too:

Jerry Tarnoff, superintendent of West Orange schools, said he was encouraged that Corzine suggested the preschool funding would only be cut as a last resort. "I am pleased he would like to commit to full funding," said Tarnoff. "Anything less, if the program were to go forward, would make it extremely difficult for the local taxpayers."

Now, Jerry's a smooth politician, and I don't think he would say anything that would irritate Corzine unnecessarily. But look at what he's saying: if the program were to go forward, and the state didn't pay for it, it would be a serious burden for local taxpayers.

So there's the threat of an unfunded mandate to the towns that would increase taxes substantially, whether the towns like it or not.

And I have another question: if it would be a serious burden for local taxpayers to pay for this, who would be burdened if the state funded it?

Those rich guys in Mendham, I guess. To hell with them, though. If they can afford to live near Whitney Houston's birthplace, they should pay for the pre-K programs in West Orange and Edison and Camden. And I hear Neil Cavuto lives there! For Pete's sake, if a Fox News anchor lives in New Jersey, he should pay twice what the ordinary citizen does!

---

Democrats Police State Spying on Citizens

We have spent the past 7 years listening to Democrats constantly squeal that the Bush administration has destroyed the rights of innocent citizens through the application of sensible anti-terrorism surveillance tactics. The New York Times even went to far as to publish the result of illegal leaks regarding an effective electronic program the result of which was to cause the program to be shut down. And one interesting fact of all of this is that none of these stories ever have a victim. Even when one is manufactured and they go to the courts, the courts throw them out as having no standing (ie they haven't been harmed).

But now, we have a clear case of the government invading an individual's privacy in an effort to cause them harm. From the Columbus Dispatch:

Vanessa Niekamp said that when she was asked to run a child-support check on Samuel Joseph Wurzelbacher on Oct. 16, she thought it routine. A supervisor told her the man had contacted the state agency about his case.

Niekamp didn't know she just had checked on "Joe the Plumber," who was elevated the night before to presidential politics prominence as Republican John McCain's example in a debate of an average American.

The senior manager would not learn about "Joe" for another week, when she said her boss informed her and directed her to write an e-mail stating her computer check was a legitimate inquiry.

The reason Niekamp said she was given for checking if there was a child-support case on Wurzelbacher does not match the reason given by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services.

I have been following this story for a while. The manager responsible for this records search has contributed the maximum to Obama's campaign. The governor of the state of Ohio has already investigated and said nothing was done wrong based on what this woman said:

Director Helen Jones-Kelley said her agency checks people who are "thrust into the public spotlight," amid suggestions they may have come into money, to see if they owe support or are receiving undeserved public assistance.

Interesting policy. So, if the Bush administration saw and Arab man on television, it would be okay to investigate him because he was holding a sign at a pro-Obama event? Does anyone believe that Obama supporter would consider that Okay? They wouldn't. But in any case, that story is an outright fabrication. Because this is what the employee who was directed to do this search said:

Niekamp told The Dispatch she is unfamiliar with the practice of checking on the newly famous. "I've never done that before, I don't know of anybody in my office who does that and I don't remember anyone ever doing that," she said today.

This is a criminal violation of privacy directed by senior officials in the Democratic party against a citizen who asked Barack Obama a question that exposed his real views on redistribution of wealth. A question that not one reporter has ever had the guts to ask Obama. And in return, they illegally directed subordinates to use government records to attempt to destroy someone they determined was a political enemy. THAT is the definition of destruction of the protection of civil liberties. THAT is an outline of just exactly how a party in power could destroy the underlying fabric of our country. And THAT is just okay with Democrats.

Read the entire article here.

---