|
|
|
| |
Three Ring Circus
March 0, 2010 QUOTABLE QUOTES "Solutions are not the answer." -Richard Nixon
March 8, 2010
"I'M FROM THE GOV'T AND I'M HERE TO HELP YOU" "The skin is an important interface between man and the environment."
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Three Ring Circus Archive
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: WILL HEALTH CARE IMPACT THE NOVEMBER ELECTIONS IN N.J.?
March 9, 2010
Interesting article in The Hill today about how New Jersey Republicans are hoping to translate Gov. Chris Christie’s victory into picking up House seats in November.
The Hill notes that “Christie beat Gov. Jon Corzine 56-39 in freshman Rep. John Adler’s district and won 51-43 in Rep. Frank Pallone Jr.’s (D) district, according to an analysis of the 2009 results. Christie also ran up impressive vote totals in Democratic strongholds like Bergen County. Christie won 13 of New Jersey’s 21 counties, beating Corzine by almost five points in a state where Democrats hold a significant registration advantage.”
Democrats, however, say Christie’s success was more a sign of frustration with Corzine than an endorsement of Christie.
But according to the article, while the GOP views Adler as a top target, they think a Pallone pickup is unlikely: “Republicans are hoping a strong challenge will bleed away some of (Pallone’s) campaign cash that would otherwise go to help other Democrats.”
Pallone has some $3.9 million cash in his re-election bank, the most of any House member, according to Politico.
Now, we can understand the interest in Adler, but we’re not so sure that the GOP should be so quick to discount the possibility of a Pallone pickup.
If Democrats go ahead and pass the health care bill – despite public opposition – Pallone may be vulnerable, given his role in crafting the bill and the volatility displayed at this summer’s Town Hall meetings.
The key, of course, is who the GOP picks to run against him.
And speaking of the GOP, Ocean County Republicans have endorsed former Philadelphia Eagle Jon Runyan of Mount Laurel to run against Adler, thereby avoiding the bloody primary that helped Adler capture the seat in 2008.
The Hill notes that Runyan is likely to follow the Christie model:
“We think that the model that the Christie campaign used, which is a focus on the economy and taxes here in New Jersey, is a good one for us as well,” said Chris Russell, an adviser to Runyan and other New Jersey GOP House challengers.
“The issue matrix is very similar,” he added, noting that Adler served in the State Legislature during Corzine’s tenure as governor. “Not only is John Adler going to have to defend his record as a foot solider for Nancy Pelosi in Washington, but John Adler was rubber-stamping the very budgets that got Jon Corzine voted out of office.”
Democrats dismissed Runyan’s attack.
“It’s impossible to take Runyan’s cookie-cutter attacks seriously considering the only thing we know about him is that he can’t bring himself to vote regularly and he’s not paying his fair share of property taxes,” said Shripal Shah, a spokesman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
We were surprised at first that Ocean County GOP chair George Gilmore would so willingly gave up his insistence that an Ocean County resident represent the district. But then we remembered that what Gilmore really wants is an all-Ocean district, and given that redistricting is on the horizon, we realized that Gilmore likely has given up anything; he’s just deferred it.
Adler, meanwhile, appears to be on everyone’s short list in Washington.
Hotline has Adler as one of 15 Democrats that House leaders are targeting to switch; the Washington Examiner has him listed as one of the “no” votes most likely to switch
With recent departures in the House, Speaker Nancy Pelosi needs 216 votes in order for health care reform to pass. From all accounts, she doesn’t have the votes.
Hence the interest in Adler.
Adler wasn’t definitive about his vote on an appearance on “Fox News Sunday” with Chris Wallace this weekend. On the one hand, he appeared to indicate that he was sticking with his no vote when he said: “I think she's (Pelosi) looking elsewhere for votes right now.”
But on the other hand, he didn’t slam the door shut, either.
From the Fox News transcript:
ADLER: Well, I think we actually have to know what the bill says. I'm one of these guys that believes I should read the bill first before I make up my mind.
Having said that, I think there were some pieces in the Senate bill that were missing. The House bill also, I think, failed to address cost containment. So I'm worried about my businesses in my district, around the country, and whether they can afford to pay for insurance for their employers or whether it'll go up 20 percent a year as they have for the last several years.
If the House and the Senate can't work out cost containment, I don't see how I could support a bill that doesn't help our business community and create more jobs.
WALLACE: I get the impression — I failed with Congressman Altmire. I get the impression you're leaning no.
ADLER: Well, we need health care reform. I'm not sure the bills coming through the House and Senate really address health care reform, delivery reform, and that involves cost containment and changing the way we reimburse for fee-for-service system.
I think we don't have a good system in some ways, even though health care is good for a lot of Americans. And I'm not sure we've gone far enough in terms of fixing the underlying system to make it affordable for businesses and for taxpayers.
If Adler does vote yeson health care, Runyan should write it off as an inkind contribution tohis campaign.
One other interesting note in The Hill article: the newspaper recalls how Christie left a congressional hearing on how he awarded deferred prosecution contracts – in a scene that was used in campaign commercials:
The encounter degenerated into a political circus, complete with Christie storming out as Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) called after him to finish testifying. Pallone and Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.), neither of whom was on the committee, watched the events unfold from front-row seats.
“Christie strikes me as the kind of candidate who might forgive but he doesn’t forget,” (Seton Hall political science professor Joseph) Marbach said. “I’m sure he would delight in a strong challenge to Pallone.”
We’ll find out in November.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: TIME TO PUT A CAP ON IT
March 8, 2010
During the gubernatorial campaign, independent Chris Daggett proposed cutting property taxes by 25 percent by extending sales tax to a host of currently untaxed items to help fund the cut.
Then-candidate Chris Christie came out against the proposal, but there are some pieces from that proposal that Gov. Chris Christie ought to embrace as part of his efforts to remake New Jersey’s broken government.
Basing the cap on municipal, county and school district budgets on the Consumer Price Index – and having no exemptions for salary increases, pension payments or health care costs.
The need for a strict cap is clear: too many local entities feel free to approve raises and contracts that are far greater than the cost of living. If the Marlboro school district were under a strict cap tied to the CPI, would they have felt free to approve a contract with 4.5% pay raises and no contribution to health care costs?
The current 4 percent cap, which was imposed in 2007 by then-Gov. Jon Corzine and the Legislature, allowed temporary exemptions for scheduled pension payments and pay raises in existing contracts. As the Star Ledger noted, other items, such as health care costs and debt payments, were excluded – and local governments could apply for waivers for other extraordinary expenditures.
In fact, the Ledger found that nearly one-third of municipalities exceeded the cap last year. “Of 76 towns that asked to exceed the cap last year, 62 were approved, according to state records. Of 33 school districts, 25 were approved — though many at a far smaller dollar amount than they asked for. The state granted $12.3 million of the requested $35.4 million in waivers for schools — down from $33.2 million of a requested $58.6 million in 2008. Towns that were approved asked for more than $47 million in exceptions,” the Ledger found.
In addition to the strict cap, Daggett also proposed a hammer: If a budget exceeds the cap, homeowners in the town will not be eligible for his proposed property tax cut. Christie could just as easily use property tax rebates – assuming they survive this budget – as a hammer.
What the Daggett people based their proposal on was the fact that real income for the folks outside government – i.e., the folks who pay the tax bills – hasn’t risen. In fact, private sector workers have faced everything from layoffs, to wage freezes to pay cuts, not to mention increases in health insurance premiums.
Christie knows this too—he has made this point repeatedly in speeches and appearances.
Christie has said that he was willing to take good ideas from wherever he found them – and he has mentioned the strict cap in interviews. But he’s promised to give local governments the tools they need to reduce costs – here’s hoping he’s including a strict cap, and a hammer, as part of that arsenal.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Guest Column: PENSION REFORM: THE ART OF THE POSSIBLE
March 8, 2010
By CARL GOLDEN
With the Senate’s unanimous approval of a package of reforms to the state’s beleaguered pension system, Gov. Chris Christie stood on the verge of accomplishing a significant policy and political victory very early in his Administration.
Despite widespread agreement that changes are critical to the pension system’s viability, the Assembly Democratic leadership has delayed action until after the Governor delivers his budget message on March 16. Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver of Essex County, while claiming the Assembly was committed to the changes, offered little explanation for the delay.
The Governor turned up the pressure somewhat when, during a radio interview, he criticized the Speaker for the delay and repeated his view that the reforms were crucial in helping to overcome the state’s fiscal difficulties.
Following the Senate vote, the leadership of the public employee unions pledged a concerted effort to either defeat or seriously weaken the package in the Assembly. Whether union pressure played a role in the decision to delay consideration is open to question, but the initial expectation that the Assembly would act both quickly and favorably may have been misplaced somewhat.
If the Assembly amends the package, it will require a return to the Senate for concurrence, a development which could delay final approval even further since the Legislature traditionally goes into a recess to allow for hearings on the Governor’s budget proposal.
The wretched condition of the pension system --- some $45 billion in unfunded liability --- had come to symbolize government’s failure over many years and Administrations of both parties to effectively manage its fiscal affairs.
Critics who contend the reform legislation is too modest fail to grasp the end game. Christie understood the politics at play by recognizing what changes could win legislative approval and then joining forces with Senate President Steve Sweeney --- a labor leader --- to see the package through.
Sweeney’s role should not be underestimated. He has been in the forefront of efforts to implement revisions in the system and, as a leader in organized labor and an experienced contract negotiator, he brought enormous credibility to the reform effort. His highly visible role also served to blunt accusations that the Governor was anti-labor.
For his part, Christie realized an overreach would have led to legislative rejection and seriously damaged, if not foreclosed entirely, future reforms. He also understood that bipartisan support would be crucial in heading off political bickering and accusations of an anti-labor philosophy. By approving the package without a dissenting vote, the Senate validated the Governor’s approach.
(To read the rest of Carl Golden's analysis of the pension reform bills, read his guest column here.)
Add Your Comments | Guest Column |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: UGLY DAYS AHEAD
March 5, 2010
In just 11 days, Gov. Chris Christie will unveil his FY 2011 state budget.
From all accounts, it’s going to be messy. Bloody, even.
But that’s what happens when you’re facing an $11 billion deficit on a budget of some $29 billion.
Assemblyman Joe Malone, R-Burlington, introduced a bill, which would call for a wage freeze for public employees. Already the unions, and some Democrats, are hollering “No.”
Hetty Rosenstein, a spokeswoman for the state's largest public worker union, the Communications Workers of America, told The Associated Press that “the unions would challenge any effort to override their negotiated contracts.”
But what’s the alternative? Public employees are scheduled to get a 3.5% raise in July – 3.5%, in a year where the taxpayers who pay these salaries have had to deal with layoffs and wage freezes, not to mention cutbacks, of their own.
Would the unions prefer layoffs to a wage freeze? There are no cushions left to overturn. There is no change left in the sofa. This budget is going to be ugly.
So ugly, in fact, that the Philadelphia Inquirer tells us that Christie is considering reducing or eliminating property tax rebates. This has the potential to be a “Read my lips” moment for Christie – who sharply criticized his predecessor for doing the same thing. We understand the budget may be so bad that he doesn’t have a choice, but taxpayers would view this as a tax increase if it were totally repealed. But we’ll wait and see.
Meanwhile, a speech Christie gave to the League of Municipalities is getting a lot of national buzz: It was featured in a column in the Baltimore Sun and by conservative blogger Michelle Malkin – which made it go national.
Here’s a key excerpt, where Christie is talking to the mayors about the need to rein costs, coutesy of The Sun:
"Our citizens are already the most overtaxed in America U.S. mayors hear it all the time. You know that the public appetite for increasing taxes has reached an end ... You know, at some point, there has to be parity between what is happening in the real world and what is happening in the public sector world. The money does not grow on trees outside this building or outside your municipal building. It comes from the hard-working people of our communities who are suffering and are hurting right now.
"And so we need to get honest with each other. In this instance, the political class [is] lagging behind the public on this. The public is ready to hear that tough choices have to be made. They're not going to like it. Don't confuse the two. But they are ready to hear the truth." The truth is, for New Jersey and any number of other states and municipalities, it's useless to pretend; we can have no more of telling people that somebody else is going to foot the bill when that's no longer true.
"We have no time left. We have no room left to borrow. We have no room left to tax. So we merely have time left to do this. We are all reaching the edge of a cliff. And it reminds me a bit of that part of 'Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid' where he had the seminal decision to make. So what did they do? They held hands and jumped off the cliff. We have to hold hands at every level of government, state, county, municipal, school board. We have to hold hands and jump off the bridge."
You can see the whole speech here.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: CAN THIS DISTRICT BE SAVED?
March 4, 2010
Another example, if any one needs it, of why New Jersey's education system needs a dramatic overhaul.
The cost to educate one child in Asbury Park is $24,428 per child. Yet, according to their new superintendent, "70 percent to 80 percent of students at all levels are not proficient in standardized testing, although there have been improvements in specific areas in different schools."
How can it be that so much money is being spent and yet kids are failing? It seems incomprehensible.
And parents are concerned enough that they are voting with their feet. Superintendent Denise Lowe said enrollment has dropped from 2,500 in the 2005-06 school year to 2,087 students this year. She told the Asbury Park Press that "the loss in students has been due to charter and parochial schools and children who live in Asbury Park but are attending school in Neptune."
And she warned that at the rate people are leaving the Asbury Park school district, the district itself will "cease to exist" unless changes are made, according to a story in the Asbury Park Press.
Clearly, just throwing more money at the school district isn't going to work.
We're spending more to educate one child in Asbury Park than is spent for tuition in Rutgers: in-state tuition at Rutgers is $9,546; out-of-state tuition is $20,456.
And yet the district is failing. The kids aren't learning.
School districts like Asbury Park are crying for reform. Can the principles that make charter schools work be applied to an entire school district? If so, Asbury Park might be a good place to try.
We know Gov. Chris Christie and his incoming education commissioner, Bret Schundler, are supporters of school choice and charter schools.
If Christie and Schundler can apply the same principles to education that Christie is taking to Trenton, then the kids in school systems like Asbury Park just might have a chance.
One thing is certain. The status quo isn't working. And the kids in Asbury Park, and every failing school district in New Jersey, deserve better than this.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: IS JOHN ADLER CONCEDING?
March 3, 2010
Perhaps Rep. John Adler has decided one term is enough. What else to think after reading that he's reconsidering his "no" vote on health care reform in the Wall Street Journal?
Rep. John Adler (D., N.J.), a freshman who won a GOP-leaning district in 2008, is also undecided, after voting no last fall. He said the Senate bill did a better job containing health costs.
In an interview, he said he had spoken directly to the president about the issue and was not worried about Republican arguments that Democrats would pay a political price for supporting the health bill. "I think people shouldn't be worried about their careers. They should be worried about doing what's right."
Meanwhile, the Burlington County GOP screening committee has endorsed former NFL lineman Jon Runyan to run against Adler in November, according to the Burlington County Times.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: POLL: PUBLIC SUPPORTS PENSION REFORMS
March 3, 2010
Six weeks in – and more importantly – two weeks after the first round of budget cuts, and Gov. Chris Christie is getting thumbs up from the public (52%-21%, with 28% undecided), according to a new FDU/PublicMind poll.
But here’s news that should steel the spines of lawmakers as they move forward: The poll also finds pension and benefit reforms enjoying wide public support, although public employees are not as enthusiastic:
Both the public and public employees back several proposals for reform of the public pension system - though the general public’s support is much stronger than that of public employees. For example, 78% of voters agree that all public employees, including teachers, should contribute some of their salary toward their health care benefits, while
public employees split with 51% agreeing and 45% disagreeing. Meanwhile, 69% of all voters say the state should cap payouts at retirement for unused vacation time, and 64% of public employees agree. Similarly, 69% of voters say payouts for unused sick leave at retirement should be capped, and 56% of public employees agree.
Asked if the state should repeal a 9 % increase in benefits enacted in 2001, voters agree by 46% to 35%, but 52% of public employees disagree and only 26% agree. On the other hand, when asked if the state should cap salaries for top public jobs at $200,000 per year, more than three-of-four voters agree (77%), and public employees agree more emphatically (84%).
Voters remain convinced that cutting spending rather than raising taxes is the way to resolve the state’s budget woes. Two-thirds (66%) say the state should hold the line on spending, even if many programs are reduced: Just one-in-five says (21%) the state should raise taxes if necessary to support programs.
Meanwhile, public employees are not happy with the governor, with 35% approving and 46% disapproving. In fact, about 33% of public employees give Christie a poor rating.
“No surprise there,” said Peter Woolley, a political scientist and director of the poll. “Public employees are on the defensive. But there is a wider range of opinion among public servants than their interest group leaders let on.”
Meanwhile, Christie has gotten some national praise as well. Mitt Romney was asked who he’d like to see run for president if he doesn’t run in 2012 (although this may be more about Romney not wanting to boost another opponent, but still) and here’s his choices ( courtesy of Hotline):
"Lots of folks. ... There are some that I don't think may have heard of like [Gov.] Bob McDonnell [R] in Virginia. ... [Gov.] Chris Christie in New Jersey, this is a guy who has -- talk about taking on a tough task. If he's able to turn that around, wow. [Ex-eBay CEO] Meg Whitman [R], my friend in California. ... We get some great leaders in the Republican Party as well as those that are on everybody's list."
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: WHY WOULD THE PUBLIC BE HOSTILE?
March 2, 2010
The Star Ledger has an interesting little story today about how lawmakers were surprised Monday when pubic employee unions started raising obections about a proposed amendment that would ask voters to mandate full funding of the state's pension system:
"(We) were a little confused," said Sen. Jim Whelan (D-Atlantic), chairman of a Senate committee that held a required public hearing today on the amendment. "We’re trying to move in the direction that the unions have been complaining about to guarantee, constitutionally, full funding."
Union officials said they feared voters would reject the measure — which has bipartisan legislative support and the governor’s thumbs up — because of the public hostility toward state workers.
"This is crazy to put this out to the public," said Rae Roeder, president of Communications Workers of America Local 1033, a state workers union. "They’re going to say no. So we’re cutting our own throat."
The amendment, part of a package of pension bills, would force the state to make its required payment to the pension fund, phased in over seven years.
Now, why would the public be hostile? It couldn't be because of stories like this in the Star Ledger, could it?
NEW BRUNSWICK -- Retirements for five police officers and one firefighter will cost the city more than $1.4 million in payouts for accumulated vacation and sick time.
Much of the payout covers police officers’ unused vacation time, and the costs come despite the city’s established caps on accrued sick days, which were put in place nearly 20 years ago. The more stringent guidelines apply primarily to employees hired since 1991. Mayor James Cahill released details on the payouts yesterday at the same time he announced the retirement of police Director Anthony Caputo, who completed his 26-year career on Sunday. Peter Mangarella, the deputy director under Caputo, was named the new director starting today. Caputo will receive $376,234, including $265,732 for unused vacation time and $110,502 for accrued sick time. Retiring with an annual salary of $174,271, Caputo will receive a yearly pension of $115,01940, according to state officials. The other four officers plan to leave their jobs before April. Capt. Leslie Levine, with 27 years on the force, will receive $310,079, from the city for unused vacation and sick time. With his annual salary of $152,844, Levine will receive an annual pension of $103,933.92, according to state records. Lt. Paul Schuster, after 36 years on the force, will receive an estimated $277,489 from the city for unused vacation and sick time. Police Sgt. William Oels, who is leaving after 30 years, will receive an estimated $219,050, and 26-year veteran Sgt. Stanley Fenkel will receive $115,534 from the city. Deputy Fire Chief Nicholas Grischuck will receive $159,161 for sick and vacation time after 30 years with the city. Public employee union leaders have said Gov. Chris Christie’s plans to target public pension benefits sparked a rush of workers to file for retirement. Caputo last month acknowledged he was leaving in part because of top elected officials plans to change benefit packages.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: RECALL QUESTION IN COURT TODAY
March 2, 2010
An appeals court today is holding a hearing on whether or not the Sussex County Tea Party can start to collect the necessary 1.3 million signatures to recall Sen. Bob Menendez from office.
The issue, to put it in its simplest terms, is whether New Jersey law allowing recalls can supersede federal law.
New Jersey voters approved a referendum that explicitly states that New Jersey voters have the right to recall any elected official, including federal officials.
Here is New Jersey's constitutional provision, which took effect in 1995:
Article 1 Section 2b
The people reserve unto themselves the power to recall, after at least one year of service, any elected official in this State or representing this State in the United States Congress. The Legislature shall enact laws to provide for such recall elections.
But opponents say the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly address the right of recall for federal officials. That was the rationale used by then-Secretary of State Nina Mitchell Wells in January, when she failed to certify the initial petition, which would authorize the tea partiers to begin gathering petitions.
A report by the Congressional Research Service, the advisory think tank for Congress, says the Constitution does not authorize a recall of federal officials:
"The recall of members was considered during the time of the drafting of the federal Constitution in 1787, but no such provisions were included in the final version sent to the states for ratification, and the specific drafting and ratifying debates indicate an express understanding of the framers and ratifiers that no right or power to recall a senator or representative from the United States Congress exists under the Constitution," Jack Maskell, the CRS report's author, wrote, according to the Washington Times.But Frank Askin of the Rutgers Constitutional Litigation Clinic told The Associated Press the the federal and state provisions have not been tested.
But the American Civil Rights Union, which is the conservatives answer to the ACLU, argues in a friend of the court brief that the issue before the New Jersey court today is not the constitutionality of the recall, but whether citizens can begin to even gather signatures on a petition.
The case could have broader implications. In addition to New Jersey, there are eight other states -- Colorado, Louisiana, Michigan, Montana, North Dakota, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin — that have laws that appear to allow the recall of elected officials,
Tea party activists are talking about using the recall mechanism as a way to block the health care reform bill from moving forward, and using it to remove pro-health care Democrats from office before their terms are off.
"Nine states, including 12 Democratic senators who are not up for re-election otherwise, could all be on the ballot with a recall," said Peter Ferrara, a lawyer for the conservative American Civil Rights Union, told the Washington Times. "Given what they're doing on health care this year, that's just going to be a huge boost to the recall effort."
We should know more soon.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: UNSUSTAINABLE
March 1, 2010
Has your salary increased by 70% since 1999?
Our guess is no.
Yet, your property taxes have risen by 70%, according to the Star Ledger.
How is that possible?
It's possible because local governments and school boards act like they're spending someone else's money.
Which they are.
Yours.
Did you know that New Jersey police officers, firefighters, teachers and state employees on average earn more than the private sector employees in New Jersey?
Yet, there are far more private sector employees in New Jersey than public sector. In fact, acccording to the Star Ledger, there are 400,000 New Jerseyans who belong to public sector unions, or 5% of the population.
Yet, they earn more than the people who pay their salaries. How is that sustainable?
The answer: It's not. It's why our state is broken.
Here's a graphic from the Ledger that shows the salary diffferential. Notice how often New Jersey is at or near the top of the nation when it comes to average salaries:
The Ledger has made some excellent suggestions on how to bring New Jersey's fiscal house back in order, including enacting a pay freeze.
You know, the same pay freeze that so may private sector employees were forced to accept. You can read the Ledger's complete two-day list of suggestions here and here.
One of the Ledger's recommendations was that the Legislature place a cap on annual increases in salary costs. We would take it one step further. We have long thought that one reason school boards are so generous with contracts is that they are not responsible for paying pension costs -- the state taxpayers pick up the bill. that's why outrages like the Marlboro school board granting its employees 23% salary hikes over 5 years affect all of us -- because we pay the pension costs on those salaries.
As a result, we think the Legislature would be well within its right to limit pay increases for any workers covered by the state pension systems -- i.e., just about all public employees -- to no more than the rate of inflation. That would put public sector employees on the same footing as the private sector -- whose raises (when they get them) are often based on the CPI.
Otherwise, we've set up a two-tier system in New Jersey, where one group of workers are enjoying raises and salaries that are significantly higher than another.
New Jerseyans simply can't afford to keep paying public employees raises, salaries, pensions and benefits that are far more generous than what is being given by the private sector.
It's not sustainable.
Now is the time for change. We may never get another chance to make it right.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Guest Column: BETTING AGAINST HORSE RACING
March 1, 2010
By CARL GOLDEN
Senate President Steve Sweeney’s recent blunt declaration about proposals to install video lottery terminals at the state’s racetracks --- “It ain’t happening,” he told an audience of Atlantic County business leaders --- sets up a potential clash of wills, competing legal opinions and executive branch versus legislative branch litigation should the Christie Administration choose to pursue the idea.
During his campaign, Christie expressed his opposition to placing the VLTs at the tracks out of his concern that it would further undercut the casino gaming industry already reeling from a years’ worth of declining revenues because of competition from casinos and slot machine parlors in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
The Governor seemed to back off his campaign pledge with the appointment of a special commission to study the state’s involvement in gaming, the racetrack industry, and sports ventures and issue a report and recommendations by the end of June.
He indicated he would not rule out placing lottery terminals at the tracks but that the commission’s recommendations would weigh heavily in any final decision.
He later suggested that he would hold expanding the VLT placement over the head of Atlantic City government to force it to implement greater and more stringent internal reforms. A recent audit by the Office of the State Comptroller uncovered numerous problem areas and instances of failure to adhere to rules and regulations in city operations.
Administration officials said that unless the city government moved expeditiously to reform itself, outside investors looking to put their venture capital into the city would be scared off by the unstable political situation.
While the Governor makes a valid argument about the shambles that is city government, the issue which will be the most contentious is whether the lottery terminals will be placed in track venues.
Sweeney has drawn a line in the sand over VLTs and clearly is convinced that any effort to place the devices at racetrack facilities will require legislative action.
In 2003, when an effort to bring VLTs to venues outside Atlantic City seemed to be gaining momentum, the competing interests commissioned legal opinions to determine if such a move could be made and under what circumstances.
One review conducted by lawyers retained by the casino industry concluded that it represented an expansion of legalized casino gaming and, as a result, would require additional authorization via a Constitutional amendment.
The state responded by claiming that the terminals, because they were different from casino slot machines, were merely an extension of the state’s lottery system --- already authorized by the Constitution --- and the state was therefore free to install the terminals just as it installed lottery terminals elsewhere.
This opinion also suggests that it could be carried out without legislative approval --- a view directly contrary to that of the Senate President.
(To read the rest of Carl Golden's analysis on the video lottery terminal and horse racing controversy, please read his guest column here.)
Add Your Comments | Guest Column |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: THE REAL WORLD
Feb. 26, 2010
Here is how we know taxes are absurd it New Jersey.
Property taxes rose 3.4% last year, and that’s supposed to be a good thing, because it’s the lowest increase in years.
But that 3.4% increase was still seven times greater than the rate of inflation, according to the Asbury Park Press.
So we ask local officials: If inflation was 0.4%, why did property taxes rise at a rate that’s seven times more than that?
We’ll answer for them: Because for too many years, many local officials chose spending over cutting budgets.
They chose to award contract that were seven, eight, nine or 10 times higher than the rate of inflation. They chose to keep hiring staff, even as the economy sputtered. They chose to keep spending at a rate higher than their neighbors – many of who lost their jobs – could afford.
And we wonder – if that 4% spending cap wasn’t in place – how many of them would have kept spending more?
And, with Gov. Chris Christie already warning that state aid cuts are coming, how many will use that as an excuse to keep raising taxes, rather than cut spending?
"I am actually a little bit surprised that there's a capacity to raise New Jersey property taxes even higher," Joseph Henchman, director of state projects for the Tax Foundation, told the Asbury Park Press. "They're already pretty high, but all of New Jersey's taxes are high, so I guess nothing should really be surprising in that regard."
Now we know that there are local governments and officials who have tried to keep a lid on spending.
But far too many view property taxes as an unlimited source of cash.
It’s time for local governments and school boards to use the same critical eye when it comes to their budgets, that Christie is going to have to use when it comes to cutting the state budget.
The days of spending tax dollars on anything other than necessities has to end. New Jerseyans can no longer afford government spending seven times greater than the rate of inflation.
Out in the real world, the taxpayers who pay their bills have had to deal with salary freezes, pay cuts, furloughs and layoffs. To make ends meet, they’ve had to cut spending and postpone their wish list. They have had to put off purchases in order to pay their taxes.
Isn’t it past time governments – on all levels – did the same?
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: CLOSING THE LOOPHOLE
Feb. 25, 2010
Predictable, we assume, but laugh out loud funny at the same time,
The Communications Workers of America – the union that represents the bulk of public employees – and three other labor unions have gone to court seeking a stay of Executive Order 7, which broadens campaign finance rules to limit donations by labor unions that have state contracts.
"You cannot treat a collective bargaining relationship like a for-profit business," said Hetty Rosenstein, state director for the CWA.
Really? Has anyone told the CWA that?
Because some public employee unions have been operating like for-profit businesses – in terms of compiling as much profit – i.e. salary increases, pensions and benefits – at the expense of the consumer, i.e., the taxpayer, for years.
If not decades.
Especially since the money, i.e. the donations these unions make, are given to political candidates, i.e. governors and lawmakers, who ultimately decide on the salary and benefits these unions receive.
And that has as much, if not arguably larger, impact on state taxes and budget than any other contract.
So how would they not have a conflict of interest? Why in the world would they not be subject to pay-to-play reforms?
The other unions suing to overturn the ban include the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, the International Federation of Professional and Technical Employees-Local 195 and the American Federation of Teachers.
Gov. Chris Christie issued Executive Order No. 7 on Jan. 20, the day after he took office. At the time, as the Star Ledger notes, Christie “said he was simply bringing unions in line with other ‘business entities,’ such as law and engineering firms that have state contracts worth more than $17,500. Those businesses are barred from donating more than $300 to statewide campaigns, but are freer to give in local races.”
Rosenstein said Christie’s order was "completely illegal” and “violates the state constitution’s separation of powers provision, the federal constitution’s equal protection guarantees and union members’ First Amendment rights,”
"The governor cannot just issue a piece of paper and have it change the law," Rosenstein said. "The Legislature gets to legislate, not the governor."
You know, it’s funny, but we don’t recall Rosenstein or anybody else raising those objections when Govs. McGreevey or Corzine signed similar pay-to-play executive orders.
Of course, those had loopholes that excluded the unions.
But that must be a coincidence.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: WHAT'S THAT SOUND?
Feb. 24, 2010
When he was running for president in 1992, Ross Perot used to warn about that “giant sucking sound.”
Perot, of course, was talking about NAFTA and the jobs it would ship south of the border.
Here in New Jersey, he’d be talking about the sound that’s made as tax dollars are swept out of wallets into the coffers of government.
Today’s latest affront comes from the New Jersey Association of Counties, whose executive director is paid $205,000 and gets a luxury car. And whose pension, like those of other employees of the organization, are paid for by the taxpayers --not to mention the $10,000 in dues that each county pays to be a member of the group.
It is so typical of the mindless largesse that runs rampant among some government officials that someone at some point thought it would be perfectly OK for a lobbying group to have their benefits paid for by the taxpayer.
But at least some county officials have become so embarrassed at this that they are withholding funds from the group. Dropping these employees out of the pension system should be next.
We may be at a tipping point in New Jersey – a moment where the scales start to move back toward the taxpayer.
Make no mistake, the unanimous Senate vote to enact pension and benefit reforms was a watershed moment in New Jersey. The Assembly is expected to introduce their version of the bills on Thursday – and NJ101.5 is reporting that they want to go even further than the Senate bills.
According to NJ101.5, lawmakers are asking OLS if they have the authority to cap bonuses paid to authority employees, limit sick days and vacation, require the workers to contribute to their health care coverage and ensure that no one at an authority makes more annually than the governor.
Currently, executive directors at eight authorities earn more than the governor’s $175,000 salary.
Kudos to the Assembly for looking to rein in those excesses at the state’s authorities.
The Assembly move comes a day after Gov. Chris Christie issued an executive order to stop authorities from lobbying – and more importantly, initating a review to see how many of those 700 largely autonomous bodies should exist, and how many should be phased out.
We thought, based on initial reports, that Christie’s order went farther than it did. But the devil is in the details, which reminds us again of the importance of reading the actual executive order itself.
Another hopeful sign: Acting Transportation Commissioner James Simpson was questioning why the Turnpike Authority was going to spend 59% more on a building by picking one contractor over the other.
Here’s how The Record described the meeting:
(Simpson) grilled the agency’s chief engineer and rattled board members with his aggressive, fast-paced questioning that brought a serious tone to typically lighthearted meetings where commissioners rarely speak. It marked a clear departure from the past several years, when board members voted on multimillion-dollar road and bridge contracts with little to no public discussion about costs or quality.
“I’m not rubber stamping anything,” said Simpson, who is serving as acting commissioner until he is officially confirmed as state Department of Transportation commissioner. “This is a new reality. You’ve got to spend turnpike money like it’s your own. A dollar saved is a dollar for pavement.”
He said transparency and customer services will be his priorities. “I’ve been (there) three weeks,” he said. “I haven’t heard anybody talk about the customer.”
Simpson said new performance metrics will be set with goals for everything from customer service to public safety to reducing accidents on the road. “On the other side, we’re going to monitor spending,” he said.
Hopeful signs, New Jersey. But we’ve still got a long way to go.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: CHRISTIE REINS IN AUTHORITIES
The executive order is not online yet, but this is great news:
From The Associated Press:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie Tuesday ordered sweeping spending restrictions in a bid to gain control of the state's 700 agencies, boards, authorities and commissions.
Under an executive order, Christie ordered all such agencies to terminate lobbying contracts as soon as legally permissible. The Press of Atlantic City reported on Monday that Christie vetoed budgets of the state thoroughbred and standardbred horse breeding associations because the thoroughbred group planned to spend $40,000 on lobbying.
The governor on Tuesday also capped all travel by employees of the authorities at $250 unless otherwise approved by the governor's office.
Christie has asked his Cabinet to evaluate the authorities and recommend which ones to cut by May 15.
More from the Star Ledger:
The governor's 15th executive order places strict limits on such governmental entities' hiring of lobbyists to seek influence in his administration. It also scales back generous retirement packages and caps travel and entertainment expenses for authority employees. And it orders a broad review, to be completed by May 15, on whether each of the dozens of boards and authorities should continue to exist. ..
The executive order stops short of giving the governor veto power over the minutes of some agencies like the PVSC, (Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission)which are not under Christie's control. That would still require an action of the Legislature, and Christie has urged lawmakers to pass a bill sponsored by Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) that would give him power over the others.
We hope the Legislature fast-tracks Weinberg's legislation next.. The authorities have been vacuuming up tax dollars with little oversight for decades. But what does it say that no other governor thought to do this before Christie?
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: ONE STEP CLOSER
Feb. 23, 2010
Halfway there.
With welcome speed and alacrity, the state Senate on Monday unanimously approved the pension and health benefit reform bills, despite the protests of hundreds of union protesters. (You can see video of the protest at the Statehouse, courtesy of the Star Ledger, here.)
Now the bills move to the Assembly, which is expected to introduce its version of the bills on Thursday. Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver told the Ledger that she wants to extend the reforms to authorities, which we heartily endorse. (In fact, we’re hoping to see an entire reform agenda for the authorities -- including pay limits and greater oversight – pass the Legislature this year.)
Now we all know the unions will apply pressure to try and stop or water down this bill, looking at the Assembly as its last stand.
So a few reminders why these bills are necessary.
Towns and counties will save an estimated $314 million next year by requiring local government employees to contribute 1.5% of their salaries toward their health insurance premiums, according to the Office of Legislative Services.
That’s $314 million in ongoing property tax relief.
Speaking of towns and counties, have you noticed the mass exodus of public officials who are retiring, in order to cash in their hefty sick leave bonuses? That’s because the reform bills would cap those payouts at $15,000 – and these officials want to get out with their money sacks intact.
The Atlantic City Press tells us that “in Atlantic City this week, the City Council is scheduled to consider paying nearly $1.5 million in unused time to 10 retiring city employees. In Little Egg Harbor Township, Ocean County, retiring police Chief Mark Siino will be paid $188,176 from the township for unused sick time, vacation and comp time.”
According to the Jersey Journal, Jersey City Assistant Business Administrator Roger Grego and Chief of Administrative Services Kathy Dealy retired Feb. 1, and “Grego walked away with $238,138.11 for 127 unused vacation days, 356 sick days and six personal days. Dealy was paid $133,447.26 for 60 unused vacation days, 269 sick days and six personal days.
…
Grego, who worked for the city for just over 38 years, was earning $127,104 when he retired and will be paid a $83,024.55 pension annually, city officials said. Dealy, who worked for the city for 27 years, was earning $103,969 and will be paid a $62,972.16 pension annually.”
Look at how much city taxpayers would have saved if the cap had been in place.
But here’s what worse: they may be retired but these two will continue to be paid by city taxpayers: "The Jersey City Council approved resolutions Wednesday to create shared services agreements with the Jersey City Municipal Utilities Authority and Jersey City Library, which have hired Dealy and Grego as consultants" according to the Journal.
How is this flagrant abuse not an end run around the system?
The answer: We all know it is. It should end immediately – if not in this package, then in a new bill.
But here’s the most compelling reason.
Writing in the Star Ledger, Andrew G. Biggs, a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., tells us this scary fact:
Without reform, public sector pension costs will crush state budgets. In fact, the true value of public pension shortfalls is far higher than even the $32 billion reported by New Jersey’s plans.
If valued by the standards applied to private pensions, New Jersey’s unfunded liability reaches $145 billion, equal to almost $17,000 for each resident. Unless pension accounting rules are updated, taxpayers in New Jersey and around the country are in for a shock when the pension bill comes due.
These hidden pension costs result from arcane but hugely important decisions regarding "discounting." Pension accounting compares the future benefits a plan has promised to the assets it holds today. The difference between the two equals the plan’s unfunded liability. Analysts make future dollar amounts comparable to dollars today by "discounting" them at a given interest rate. For instance, assuming 5 percent interest, one dollar today could fund $1.05 in benefits a year from now. A higher discount rate implies that each dollar of today’s assets can fund more benefits tomorrow.
But how do you choose the correct discount rate? Public pensions use the rate of return they project for their portfolios of stocks and bonds — in New Jersey’s case, 8.25 percent per year. Using this method, as of June 30, 2008, New Jersey’s three main pension plans had unfunded liabilities of around $32 billion. That’s about $3,775 for each New Jersey resident and slightly more than all state revenues this year. Since mid-2008, markets have declined, so we can expect that today’s shortfalls are even larger.
But here’s the problem: While the stocks and bonds held by pensions can be highly risky, the benefits promised to public employees are practically risk-free. In New Jersey and around the country, public sector pension benefits have legal and constitutional protections that make them almost impossible not to pay. As Donald Kohn, the vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, put it: "The only appropriate way to calculate the present value of a very low-risk liability is to use a very low-risk discount rate." Pension plans’ violation of this rule, Kohn said, means that "current measures of pension liabilities might be less than fully revealing."
Academic studies discount public pension liabilities using the interest rate on U.S. Treasury securities. By that measure, New Jersey’s unfunded pension liabilities are truly staggering: around $145 billion. While New Jersey pensions report they have assets sufficient to cover 73 percent of liabilities, using proper market valuation shows these plans are only 38 percent funded.
If we don’t fix the system, public employees won’t be able to count on their pensions in the future. The system is broken. The Senate took the first step. We look forward to the Assembly finishing the job.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: A TIME OF CHOOSING
Feb. 22, 2010
The state Senate is supposed to vote on the pension reform bills today, and union leaders are already making not-so-veiled warnings to lawmaker.
“Despite the fact that Chris Christie thinks he can rule by executive order, much of his agenda will have to go through the Legislature, and Democrats will have to start acting like Democrats," Bob Master, a spokesman for the Communications Workers of America, told the Star Ledger.
We take that to mean that the CWA, which represents more than 40,000 state workers and 15,000 county and municipal workers, expects Democrats to block the pension reform bills.
That seems unlikely to happen in the Senate, where Senate President Steve Sweeney has already lined up more sponsors than votes needed for passage.
But the Assembly has yet to introduce the bills. So our guess is the unions are hoping to stop the bills there.
The unions, after all, just spent much of their political capital helping to elect Democrats to the Assembly.
According to the Star Ledger, unions gave “more than $814,400 in campaign contributions to Democrats in New Jersey last year — nearly four times the amount that went to Republicans, according to the records. … And over the past six years, they have given $5 million to Democratic candidates and election committees that still control the Legislature, compared with $1 million given to the Republicans.”
That doesn’t count the radio ads that the NJEA has begun slamming these new pension reforms.
Frankly, the shortsightedness of the unions makes no sense. The pension systems are not sustainable. The money won’t be there for future retirees unless changes are made.
Yet, the unions are lobbying to keep the status quo. And earning the wrath of the public while doing so.
Which brings us to the challenge facing Democrats.
The public is demanding change. They didn’t elect Chris Christie to be governor because they thought things were heading in the right direction.
Assembly Democrats are going to be under significant pressure from the unions to stop these reforms.
But now is a time of crisis in Trenton.
The state is broke.
We can’t afford the pension and benefits system as it currently exists. It will break the bank.
The taxpayers get this. Why the unions are refusing to accept this reality, only they can say.
During the committee meeting on Thursday, Sen. Jim Whelan, D-Atlantic, himself a public school teacher, tried to talk reality to those opposing the bill,
From the Press of Atlantic City:
Shortly before committee members voted to approve three bills and a constitutional resolution, Whelan, who teaches in the Atlantic City school district, told hundreds of assembled public workers — including dozens of teachers — that state workers should no longer claim they needed large pensions to make up for low pay.
“I’m of a generation that that was true for,” Whelan said at a hearing of the Senate State Government, Wagering, Tourism and Historic Preservation Committee that he chairs.
“Quite bluntly, when I began teaching — almost 100 years ago, not quite — we made lousy money, and you were always going to make lousy money. That was true whether you were a teacher, a cop, a fireman, any public employees across the board. We were underpaid,” he said.
As the state now tries to close a pensions shortfall of about $34 billion, Whelan reminded the crowd of how pensions had sometimes grown in lean times.
“There were times when raises weren’t given, but benefits were, enhancements to pensions were,” he said.
But he said times had changed.
“We no longer make lousy money,” he said.
“The fact of the matter is that public employees across the board in New Jersey make above what the private sector is paying, of comparative education and comparative time of service.”
This is the challenge facing Democrats. It’s time to choose – the special interests, or the public interest.
The unions may be swarming the halls in Trenton, but the taxpaying public back home is watching.
And they’re not just watching what happens on pension reforms – they’re watching budget cuts as well.
That’s why it was disappointing that Assemblyman Lou Greenwald’s first act was to reflexively hold a public hearing and point out how the cuts would hurt.
We’ve got an $11 billion budget deficit. All the cuts will hurt
For this state to work again, it’s going to require real courage on the part of the governor, and lawmakers. It’s going to require making choices that will hurt now, so that the taxpayers can afford to keep living here.
We can’t afford the status quo.
The public knows that – and they took their anger out on Gov. Corzine in November, at the same time they re-elected Democrats to the Assembly.
But if lawmakers don’t follow through on pension reforms, if they don’t cut spending, if they don’t put the public ahead of the special interests – well, let’s just say they won’t have Corzine to hide behind next November.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: ABSURDITIES
Feb. 19, 2010
Why wasn’t this front-page news in today’s newspapers?
Heck, we had trouble even finding this in today’s papers.
But this is outrageous.
The Office of Inspector General released an audit of the state’s more than 40 authorities. And here, according to a press release, is what they found:
- Eight executive officers have a base salary in excess of the Governor’s salary of $175,000.
- 748 authority employees are paid in excess of $100,000 per year.
- The number of employees at State authorities has decreased by over 2,000 since 2006.
- Approximately half of the authorities OIG reviewed were not required to and did not participate in the State Furlough Program requiring employees to take 10 unpaid leave days.
Several authorities:
- have more paid holidays than the State;
- provide more generous vacation and/or sick leave than the State;
- permit employees to annually “cash in” unused sick and vacation time;
- have more generous travel and entertainment policies than the State; and
- use the federal rate of $.55/mile for vehicle mileage reimbursement rather than the State’s rate of $.31/mile.
Now, we all know that authorities are patronage pits. And what’s worse, we pay for them.
And we just don’t pay for them now. We pay for them later.
There are more than 20,000 employees who work at the authorities. And guess what? Nearly all these authorities are enrolled in the state pension system. And that means we pay those pensions.
And those pensions cost a lot more at higher salaries.
And seriously, what justifies any of these guys making more than the governor?
Look at some of these ridiculous salaries: the North Jersey District Water Supply Commission: the maximum salary is $212,688; two earn above $150,000; 11 between $100,000 and $150,000, and 26 between $75,000 and $100,000.
That’s 39 out of a staff of 167 – or nearly one-quarter.
Which is absurd.
The Passaic Valley Sewer Commission, whose executive director was making $303,967 – until Christie highlighted his salary, and he announced plans to resign. But there are three others who earn more than $200,000, and 80 who earn between $100,000 and $200,000.
Also absurd.
The New Jersey Building Authority has 8 employees; the executive director’s salary is $180,000; 2 earn above $100,000 and three between $80,000 and $98,000- which is more than half the staff.
Again, absurd.
We could go on, but you get the point. .
And of course, a number of these agencies also get state health benefits. Which our tax dollars help pay for.
Here are the eight agencies with executive directors who earn more than the governor, as of fall 2009:
o Passaic Valley Sewerage Commissioners’ Executive Director’s salary: $303,967 per
year.
o NJ Transit Executive Director’s salary: $261,000 per year.
o NJ Sports & Exposition Authority Executive Director’s salary: $260,000 per year.
o North Jersey District Water Supply Commission Executive Director’s salary: $212,688 per year.
o NJ Schools Development Authority’s Chief Executive Officer’s salary: $195,000 per
year.
o NJ Economic Development Authority’s Chief Executive Officer’s salary: $186,600 per year.
o Atlantic City Convention & Visitors Authority’s4 President’s salary: $185,980 per year.
o NJ Building Authority’s Executive Director’s salary is $180,000 per year.
By the way, the largest authority, in terms of employees? NJ Transit, with 11,838. The maximum salary was $261,000; and 263 above $100,000 and that’s just the 1,939 who are non-agreement staff.
So we certainly hope that Christie’s administration looks toward cutting internally before hiking fares.
We also hope the Legislature holds hearing to rein in these authorities: give the governor veto power over the minutes, set limits on salaries and perks to match executive branch levels, and extend the pension and benefit reforms to authority members as well.
Kudos, by the way, to senators for moving the first set of pension reforms out of committee. Senate President Steve Sweeney said the entire Senate will vote on the bills Monday.
Expect a huge showdown at the Statehouse – the first of what will likely be many to come.
But there's a reason why New Jersey is so overtaxed. We have been too generous for too long. This absurd number of authorities, and the cushy fiefdoms they've built, is just one more example of what's wrong with our state.
And it has to end.
Now.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: SYMBOLS
Feb. 19, 2010
In public relations battles, symbols are important. They can capture the public’s imagination and define a message, despite the best attempts of any campaign or communications guru.
Not to mention any governor.
Think toilet paper and Gov. Florio’s $2.8 billion tax hike. Gov. Corzine and the flying pigs over the statehouse.
Now, as participants in the new media, we fully agree that the governor’s office needs to communicate via his website, Facebook, Twitter, and, of course, blogs.
And we agree that by doing so, the governor expands his ability to communicate directly to the public – especially as the battle over the budget cuts heats up.
It’s not like Gov. Corzine didn’t have someone who updated his website.
But in an era of cost-cutting, creating a $60,000 director of new media position could seem, shall we say, inconsistent. Unless, of course, the governor is reducing the overall number of positions on his staff, and in his press office, even with this hire.
If that’s the case, and he’s spending less tax dollars, and reallocating resources, then frankly this becomes much less of a story, if at all.
But it’s up to the governor’s communications office to make that case – and so far, they haven’t.
Instead, you read stories like this where opponents of Christie’s cuts question this hire against their cuts – as if one offsets the other.
We all know that opponents of Christie’s budget cuts are going to pull out all the stops. We know they’ll advertise, they will rally, and they will hold public hearings. They will highlight stories that show how unfair these cuts are.
And they will look for Christie to make mistakes, to find symbols that they can use against him.
Like the governor – as this headline calls it – hiring his own “personal tweeter.”
But having a governor who cut the size of his own staff is an important symbol too – assuming, of course, he did.
Otherwise, well, let’s just say that the governor’s not going to have to wait for Ricky Ricardo to tell him that he’s got some ‘splaining to do.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: 'A PARADE OF HORRIBLES'
Feb. 18, 2010
And so it begins.
Can we all just stipulate, from the beginning, that there are going to be cuts that no one wants to make? That good and worthwhile programs may lose funding?
But when your state is broke, when you are facing a $2 billion hole in this year’s budget, and $11 billion next year, there are no good choices.
You either have to raise taxes and revenues, or cut spending.
To which we ask again: Who honestly thinks New Jersey isn’t taxed enough?
Assemblyman Lou Greenwald hosted a budget hearing Wednesday to highlight the pain that Gov. Chris Christie’s budget cuts would bring.
Christie called the hearing “a parade of horribles.” And it was – there was moving testimony from a blind 13-year-old boy, a school district administrator and a mental health advocate.
The purpose was to show just how bad the cuts are.
As if we didn’t know.
Later Wednesday, Christie warned school districts that state aid could be cut by 15%.
“I understand that this is going to create challenges for people in the short term," Christie said. "It stinks."
NJ Transit is warning service cuts and fare hikes of 20% to 30% may be on the way.
And the news is likely to keep getting worse.
But we have a question: If we all agree that New Jerseyans pay too much in taxes, does it not follow that we have a government we can’t afford? And if we have a government we can’t afford, doesn’t that necessitate cuts – including unpleasant ones?
And doesn’t it also follow that there will have to be cuts on the local level?
Case in point: Cherry Hill Business Administrator Jim Devereaux told the Assembly panel that if he has to cut $3.9 million in excess surplus it “would unfairly affect districts that planned and saved for difficult fiscal times.”
Devereaux, according to the Burlington County Times, “said the reduction in this year’s aid would force Cherry Hill to use surplus earmarked for property tax relief. That loss, plus an expected 10 to 25 percent reduction in state aid for the upcoming 2010-11 school year, would likely require the district to lay off about 175 teachers and staff members.”
What Devereaux didn’t say, until he was asked, was that district employees were scheduled for 4.5 percent raises this year.
4.5 percent.
In this economy
How are taxpayers supposed to afford that?
Here’s the answer. They can’t.
So what are we supposed to do? Act like it’s business as usual?
Just keep taxing ourselves into oblivion?
Some lawmakers want Christie to re-impose the so-called millionaire tax to avoid cuts. OK. That’s $1 billion.
Where does the other $10 billion come from?
The “collective wisdom and experience of the Legislature,” which Greenwald offered to Christie, has helped lead us into the current abyss.
We’re not saying that lawmakers shouldn’t offer alternatives. Of course they should.
But business as usual just can’t work anymore.
The state is broke.
So are the taxpayers. They want change.
It’s time Trenton gave it to them -- not hold hearings to tell us why they can't.
Add Your Comments | Daily Muse |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Quote of the Day
“Is Christie still popular? Yes. But will he still be popular enough in November to elect somebody? God only knows,” said Maurice Carroll, who director of the Quinnipiac Polling Institute. (3/9/10)
|
|
|
