ShapTalk.com

ShapTalk.com Partners with TheAlternativePress.com to Provide Political Commentary

2008-10-27T00:01:00.002-04:00

This morning, ShapTalk.com officially partnered with TheAlternativePress.com, the State of New Jersey's first all-online local newspaper to provide political commentary for the online newspaper.* If you currently link to ShapTalk.com, please move your link to TheAlternativePress.com

TheAlternativePress.com offers daily local, regional and State news and information and is updated 24-7, 365 days a year. In addition, TheAlternativePress.com offers movie-quality video capability, providing video streaming of everything from high school sports clips to interviews with government officials to advertising promotions.

As part of the new arrangement, ShapTalk.com will no longer continue to operate. Michael Shapiro's columns will now appear on TheAlternativePress.com. All other contributors to ShapTalk.com will similarly have the opportunity to write for TheAlternativePress.com

We have been honored to serve you during the past two years and look forward to continuing to serve you in the years ahead as TheAlternativePress.com This site will remain available for the time being but will no longer be updated or maintained. From now on, please join us at TheAlternativePress.com

We hope you enjoy TheAlternativePress.com and look forward to hearing from you.

Thank you for your continued support.

* Both sites are owned by Michael Shapiro.

Toss Up: Corzine or Christie?

2008-09-24T23:37:00.001-04:00

Governor Corzine may have an upside down 40%-51% approval rating; however, he is still in a dead heat with current United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey, Chris Christie, in a hypothetical matchup for the 2009 gubernatorial election. This disclosure is not new. In August, a poll showed that Christie would defeat Governor Corzine by only 1% in a theoretical race. Given the Governor’s low approval numbers, it should give him comfort that his strongest Republican challenger can only muster a tie despite all of the problems facing the State of New Jersey and the shockingly low approval ratings of the Democratic Legislature.

Chris Christie, a former Freeholder and fundraiser for President Bush’s initial campaign for the White House, has made battling corruption his top priority. During his tenure, a number of high-profile politicians have been indicted and convicted, including Newark Mayor Sharpe James. Opponents of Mr. Christie have repeatedly pointed out that the majority of his successes have been against Democratic politicians, and they have questioned whether Mr. Christie has behaved in a partisan fashion. Attacks on Christie escalated after he gave a $50M+ contract to the firm of former United States Attorney General John Ashcroft to be a federal monitor regarding a New Jersey company. Christie’s actions were a catalyst for Congressional hearings on the subject as well as calls for reform. One would think that based on all of this, Christie would be a well known commodity in New Jersey.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Toss Up: Corzine or Christie?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Who are the Real Losers in the Rutgers Stadium Debacle?

2008-09-17T00:58:00.000-04:00

The private fundraising effort to pay for a $30M shortfall in the financing of a $102M stadium expansion for Rutgers University has been a debacle. Less than $2M has been raised since the Governor and State Senator Raymond Lesniak (D-Union) announced the initiative nearly a year ago. Governor Corzine, who is leading the effort, has donated $1M, the vast majority of the funds obtained to date. Meanwhile, even the strongest supporters of the idea, like Senator Lesniak, now say that the drive will result in far less than $30M and more like $10M, leaving a gaping $20M shortfall in funding. Interest-bearing short-term commercial loans are currently subsidizing the stadium expansion, creating further indebtedness.

Currently, the Rutgers Board of Governors is discussing how to make up the shortfall but the ideas on the table, including raising ticket prices, hiking tuition, and taking stadium revenues from other athletic programs, will likely not cover the shortfall and worse, will cripple the Rutgers athletic program and the University itself since fans are already balking at the increase in ticket prices this year and students are disturbed about the steep tuition hike last year...

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Who are the Real Losers in the Rutgers Stadium Debacle?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

It IS Back to the House for Andrews

2008-09-08T07:46:00.000-04:00

On June 5, 2008, I wrote a column about the stinging double-digit defeat Congressman Andrews suffered at the hands of Senator Frank Lautenberg in the June Democratic Primary and asked, “Is it back to the House for Andrews?” Andrews himself steadfastly denied that he would ever return to the House, as did his wife, Camille, who sat on the line for the seat in the June Primary. However, this past week, Mr. Andrews reversed course and announced that he would retake the Democratic line from his wife and run in November for re-election to his Congressional seat.

It appears that Congressman Andrews has indeed had second thoughts about surrendering his seat since his political future after his June demise is now an uncertain one. While some voters may be angry with him for his duplicitous behavior, the residents of his District will likely welcome him with open arms given his strong popularity in that District. Those who will be most upset are people who are not residents of his district and, therefore, cannot vote in that election.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: It IS Back to the House for Andrews

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Pension Reforms Delayed!

2008-09-03T00:51:00.000-04:00

On June 23, 2008, the New Jersey State Legislature enacted several reforms to the State’s pension system which are still awaiting Governor Corzine’s signature to make them into law. The reforms include raising the retirement age from 60 to 62, prohibiting public employees from counting time spent working in other states towards the 25 years of work required to quality for lifetime New Jersey health benefits, and eliminating Lincoln’s Birthday as a state holiday. They were recommended by a pension reform task force two years earlier and could save the State’s taxpayers $300 million over 15 years.

Unfortunately, Governor Corzine has refused to give the green light to implement them. Had he signed the legislation directly after the June vote, the reforms would have been effective August 1, 2008, affecting all new public employees hired after that date. Hundreds of employees have been hired since August 1, 2008, and more continue to be placed on the State payroll each day while the legislation awaits his signature.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Pension Reforms Delayed!

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Olympics Masked China’s Disdain for Human Rights

2008-08-27T00:16:00.000-04:00

The Beijing Olympics will be remembered for the stellar performances of Olympic athletes, from Michael Phelps to Usain Bolt. It will also be memorialized for its top-flight athletic facilities and venues. What may not be remembered, however, is the Chinese government’s disdain for basic human rights. While there was wall to wall coverage of the games, there was only a small fraction of that coverage reserved for discussion of the Chinese government's policies. Particularly noteworthy, China's "re-education" program has barely registered in recent news.

The Chinese government is currently detaining upwards of 290,000 people in centers to “re-educate” them for a period ranging anywhere from one to three years, if not longer. These detainees are mostly political and religious dissenters, though some are petty criminals. In “re-education” centers, the incarcerated are forced to labor and confess to the charges levied against them. Punishment is provided without trial and there is no appeals process.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: The Olympics Masked China’s Disdain for Human Rights

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

New Jersey’s District 3: A Democratic Pick-Up?

2008-08-20T00:08:00.000-04:00

Much of the talk in New Jersey regarding contested Congressional seats this Fall has centered around District 7, where Democratic Assemblywoman Linda Stender is running against Republican State Senator Leonard Lance to fill the House seat vacated by retiring Republican Congressman Michael Ferguson (R-7). The most likely Democratic pick-up, however, is actually in District 3, where Democratic State Senator John Adler is battling Republican Christopher Myers to fill the seat of retiring Congressman James Saxton (R-3). Adler has raised approximately two million dollars for his run and as a popular State Senator from Cherry Hill who is well-respected for his policy-making abilities and breadth of knowledge regarding State and Federal issues, he is a formidable opponent of Mr. Myers, the Mayor of Medford, New Jersey and Lockheed-Martin Vice-President.

After a tough primary, Myers had only a little more than $150,000 on hand, compared to $1.9M for Senator Adler. Popular retiring Congressman Jim Saxton won re-election in 2006 with 58% of the vote. Given the unpopularity of President Bush in New Jersey and the support by Myers of many Bush policies, Senator Adler has both the financial and political edge...

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: New Jersey's District 3: A Democratic Pick-Up?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Wounded Warrior Workplace Initiative

2008-08-13T00:03:00.000-04:00

Assemblyman Bob Straniere, a conservative Republican running for the 13th Congressional District seat in New York, recently announced the Wounded Warrior Workplace Initiative, a proposal to encourage the hiring of wounded veterans or their families by members of Congress and congressional candidates. As part of the Wounded Warrior Workplace Initiative, Mr. Straniere has created The Straniere Pledge, to hire wounded veterans or members of their immediate family for at least one-third of his congressional staff.

Straniere, a Vietnam-era veteran who served as an officer in the U.S. Army, is definitely on to something. While he is running for Congress this year and his Initiative will likely garner him support for that bid, his proposal is one that should be adopted by members of Congress, especially since they are our representatives who decide when and if to send servicemen and women into battle at great risk of death and/or injury.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com:The Wounded Warrior Workplace Initiative

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Will Councilman Hsing Decide the 7th District Race?

2008-08-06T00:23:00.000-04:00

The 7th Congressional District in New Jersey is one of the most hotly contested races in the State and throughout the country this year. This is due, in part, because Assemblywoman Linda Stender narrowly lost to Congressman Mike Ferguson in 2006, and Ferguson announced he would not seek another term. Stender now faces Republican State Senator Leonard Lance in the upcoming general election, and Michael Hsing. Who? Michael Hsing, a Republican Bridgewater Councilman, is running as an Independent, after dropping out of the Republican Primary for the same seat earlier this year, claiming it was rigged.

In a typical congressional district in New Jersey, the run of a Republican turned Independent would make little difference. In the 7th Congressional District, it could wind up making the whole difference. Given Hsing’s Republican orientation, Senator Lance’s campaign can be none too pleased regarding Hsing’s entry into the race.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com:Will Councilman Hsing Decide the 7th District Race?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

It’s the Secrecy, Stupid!

2008-07-30T00:29:00.000-04:00

Rutgers is, once again, making news; however, this time it is not favorable. The Star-Ledger recently reported that Rutgers head football coach, Greg Schiano, negotiated a number of side deals which would induce him to remain committed to the University. The deals include a new football stadium to be built by Rutgers by next year or the release of Schiano from his contract without penalty should the stadium not be built. He would also receive $250,000 in additional compensation channeled through a vendor so that it would not appear on the University's books. This is besides his $2M annual contract, various bonuses for meeting certain milestones, free land given by the University on which Schiano could build a home, an $800,000 interest free loan for Schiano that is being forgiven at a rate of $100,000 per year for every year he stays at Rutgers, and free unlimited use of a helicopter and a jet. Meanwhile, the Rutgers Board of Governors voted in early July to increase tuition 8.5% next year, raising tuition, room and board to over $21,000 per year for a full-time in-state student.

While the costs to New Jersey taxpayers and Rutgers students for Coach Schiano's deals are high, they are not considered to be unusual when compared to what other successful college football coaches are receiving throughout the nation. Rutgers’ commitment to big-time college football began years ago. The ability to retain Coach Schiano, the recently successful Rutgers football team, and the outstanding recruits during the past few years are the fruits of that commitment. While one may legitimately question the University’s priorities, given massive budget shortfalls and high annual tuition increases, the desire to turn the football program into a marquee one is a goal that is shared by many residents of New Jersey, alums and non-alums alike.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: It's the Secrecy, Stupid!

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Christie’s Probe of Katz May Cause Him More Harm than Good

2008-07-23T07:39:00.000-04:00

The conventional wisdom is that the recently announced federal probe into the dealings of former Corzine friend, Carla Katz, with the local CWA which she had led, will score United States Attorney Chris Christie political points with Republicans, Independents, and some anti-Corzine Democrats. Governor Corzine has been battling to keep emails between Katz and himself from becoming public and Katz is already under investigation by the national CWA for alleged improper conduct. Christie’s federal investigation promises more negative Katz headlines, more unfavorable publicity for the Governor, and positive publicity for Mr. Christie. However, Mr. Christie’s possible gubernatorial ambitions may actually be undermined by this probe.

Should Christie declare for Governor, it would be awkward indeed for a gubernatorial candidate to have been investigating the former girlfriend of the Governor he is trying to unseat. Should there be leaks of the investigation, particularly the leak of any salacious details regarding Ms. Katz, Christie will open himself up to attacks for inappropriately politicizing the Katz investigation for his own advantage. Should Christie be tough on Katz, he again leaves himself open to being portrayed as an opportunistic politician in the guise of a lawman. Conversely, should he facilitate a deal with her, it will also be seen as politically expedient to have investigated and punished the Governor’s former girlfriend prior to the gubernatorial campaign.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Christie’s Probe of Katz May Cause Him More Harm than Good

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

A Troubling Sign for New Jersey’s Economic Future

2008-07-16T20:00:00.001-04:00

The New Jersey Policy Research Organization, the think tank of the New Jersey Business and Industry Association (NJBIA), recently released a Study of New Jersey’s business climate. The Study included a telephone poll of 249 business leaders as well as interviews of 29 New Jersey and out-of-state business and government leaders. It also provided 37 policy recommendations for New Jersey based on other states’ best practices. The results of the Study are a troubling sign for New Jersey’s economic future.

When asked what is most likely to prevent a company from reaching its goals, 21% of Study respondents said the affordability of living in New Jersey, while 20% said New Jersey’s unfavorable tax structure, and 19% said the availability of a skilled workforce. Regarding the most negative impact on New Jersey’s companies, 26% of Study respondents cited the State’s tax policy while 16% said New Jersey’s healthcare policy most negatively impacts the State’s business community. Most troubling for New Jersey’s economy, 42% of Study respondents said that if the State government’s policies remain the same, the business climate will deteriorate while only 26% said that the climate will improve.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: A Troubling Sign for New Jersey's Economic Future

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

A Victory for “Pay to Play” Reformers

2008-07-09T00:09:00.000-04:00

This past week, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey issued a decision in In the Matter of the Appeal by Earle Asphalt Company, a case involving the owner of a road construction business and his political contribution to the Monmouth County Republican Committee in June 2007. Walter Earle III, owner of Earle Asphalt Company, made the contribution at the behest of former State Senate President John Bennett, failing to realize that the contribution could bar him from obtaining business from the State. After obtaining counsel and being advised that his contribution might violate “pay-to-play” laws, Mr. Earle requested that the contribution be returned. Meanwhile, Earle Asphalt Company submitted a bid to the New Jersey Department of Transportation for a roadwork contract involving Interstate 195. It was the low bid and therefore Earle Asphalt would have been awarded the State contract. However, the Department of Treasury informed the company that it was disqualified from award of the contract because of Mr. Earle’s June 2007 political contribution. Mr. Earle appealed this decision and took the matter to court.

At issue was a 2005 amendment to the Campaign Contributions and Expenditure Reporting Act, also known as Chapter 51, which prohibits the awarding of a contract of over $17,500 by a state agency to a business entity that has provided more than $300 in the preceding eighteen months to any State or county political party, the Governor, or a candidate for Governor. The company’s primary argument was that Chapter 51 violated its freedom of speech and association rights. Citing a decision by the United States Supreme Court, the Superior Court of New Jersey stated that a statute, like Chapter 51, that limits political contributions is appropriate if the State is able to show a sufficiently important interest and the statute is written in such a way as to avoid unnecessary restrictions to the freedom of association.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: A Victory for "Pay to Play" Reformers

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Should Zoffinger Consider Stepping Down?

2008-07-02T19:54:00.002-04:00

During his tenure as the President and CEO of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority (NJSEA), George Zoffinger streamlined operations, eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. As former Chairman of the New Brunswick Development Corporation, he played an integral role in the revitalization of New Brunswick. Unfortunately, his tenure on the Rutgers Board of Governors has been marred by allegations of conflicts of interest and ethical dilemmas outside the board room, as well. Given these issues and Mr. Zoffinger's professional work and commitment to the many other boards on which he serves, it may be wise for him to consider stepping down from the Rutgers BOG, at least temporarily.

In 2004, then-Governor James E. McGreevey nominated George Zoffinger to the Rutgers University Board of Governors (BOG) as one of the Board’s “Public Governors,” for a six-year term. While his nomination was pending, he was confronted with allegations of a conflict of interest because, at the time, he was Chairman of the New Brunswick Development Corporation (Devco), a real estate development company that is based in New Brunswick (the home of Rutgers University) and does a great deal of work for both Rutgers and the City of New Brunswick. Devco was involved with such projects as the new Rockoff Hall University Apartments and the Rutgers Public Safety Building. In November 2004, Mr. Zoffinger held a meeting with students regarding the issue and told them that there would be no conflict if he served on the BOG and that he would eliminate any appearance of a conflict of interest by not being involved in any real estate or sports matters that come before the Board.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Should Zoffinger Consider Stepping Down?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Corzine’s E-mail Fiasco: A Profound Lack of Judgment?

2008-06-25T00:28:00.000-04:00

Governor Corzine's refusal to release e-mails exchanged with Carla Katz, head of the CWA, despite a Court Order to do so, is troubling. The Governor is claiming executive privilege and, although he continues to fight the Court Order, he recently acknowledged that because of his upcoming battle for re-election, he may accede to the Court’s wishes and release the e-mails. State Republican Chairman Tom Wilson had requested the communications soon after the CWA and the Governor’s Office came to agreement regarding a new contract last year. In May, Superior Court Judge Paul Innes decided that the e-mails constituted public information and ordered them released. While the Governor is concerned that his refusal to turn over the e-mails will be an issue when he runs for re-election, he is missing the bigger picture: his lack of judgment regarding the exchange of the e-mails in the first place.

Love can make people do crazy things, but it is no defense for the Governor’s ineptitude on this issue. Governor Corzine was the former Chairman of Goldman Sachs, one of the most sophisticated investment banks in the world. He later was a United States Senator, only one of a hundred to hold the prestigious post. Finally, he became Governor of New Jersey. A person holding any of these positions should recognize that utmost discretion needs to be used when exchanging e-mails with the head of the State's most powerful union. Furthermore, anyone in such a position must know that one needs to keep one's personal life and one's business life completely separate and devoid of potential conflicts. Finally, anyone with a basic understanding of the right of the public to access government information should recognize that when a government official and a union leader are exchanging e-mails, those e-mails are likely to be deemed public information.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Corzine's E-mail Fiasco: A Profound Lack of Judgment?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Let’s Talk About Energy

2008-06-18T19:18:00.000-04:00

As gas prices continue to skyrocket, the "solution" touted by some candidates is a "gas tax holiday," a proposal to eliminate the federal gas tax for a few months, saving the average driver approximately 25 dollars. Thankfully, many critics have risen to the fore to attack the “solution” as a politically expedient, short-sighted meaningless proposal. While the Presidential candidates have been talking about making our nation less dependent on foreign oil, the serious talk about how to go about doing so has been sorely lacking.

In several South American countries, cars are being run on sugar. In others, vegetable oil, soybeans or corn are being used to run their vehicles. Yet, here in the United States we are addicted to foreign oil. Why? Because the oil industry is vast and its purse strings tug at all key members and divisions of the federal government and because automakers do not want to undergo the costs involved to convert automobiles to fuel sources other than gasoline. Add to this the plethora of lobbyists for and against the various alternative energy sources and progress remains stalled.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Let's Talk About Energy.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Corzine Should Not Count His Chickens…

2008-06-11T00:51:00.000-04:00

With approval ratings hovering in the 30’s, Jon Corzine is preparing to seek a second term as Governor of New Jersey. The lopsided defeat of Rob Andrews might give the Chief of State supreme confidence that a primary challenge will not materialize or will fail miserably. Should a challenge not materialize, Mr. Corzine may feel secure knowing that New Jersey is a blue state that is getting more blue by the day. However, he might possibly be misreading the tea leaves.

Governor Corzine should take little solace from Tuesday’s Primary results. Congressman Andrews ran a 10-week campaign against a long-time and popular incumbent. Should a Democrat decide to run against Corzine, it will be a significantly longer campaign against a one-term Governor with high unfavorables and many new found political enemies. In addition, as long as a Congressman does not run against Corzine, the Congressional delegation will not feel that their political aspirations are being usurped, resulting in a less unified block in favor of the Governor than the tight coalition of Congressmen that backed Senator Lautenberg. The Governor of New Jersey is one of the most powerful chief executives in the country. Most politicians in this State with higher ambitions would like to call Drumthwacket their home. There are plenty of pols itching for a run should the right conditions present themselves.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Corzine Should Not Count His Chickens...

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Is It Back to the House for Andrews?

2008-06-05T05:56:00.000-04:00

Watching the campaign of Rob Andrews for the United States Senate has been difficult. Congressman Andrews is an intelligent and thoughtful official who has a keen interest in public policy. By most accounts, he was next in line to run for the Senate when Senator Lautenberg retires in 2014 or for Governor if Governor Corzine decides not to run for re-election in 2009. However, it appears that his impatience and the threat that possibly one of his colleagues might run in 2009 or 2014 encouraged him to get involved this time around. He could have orchestrated a positive issue-based campaign, thereby creating an aura of inevitability for a future run. Or he could have chosen the path he did follow: a harshly negative campaign in which a major loss means political oblivion. Or does it?

Why he chose to go the slash-and-burn-route is anyone’s guess, but after serving a decade-plus in the House of Representatives and the late night commute back from D.C., the Congressman may have outlived his stay at the House and decided it was either up or out. Therefore, he chose to go all out against Senator Lautenberg in an attempt to win a ticket to the upper chamber. On Tuesday, voters decided that for Congressman Andrews, it was not time to move up but rather to move out.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Is It Back to the House for Andrews?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Supporting Darfur at the UN Security Council

2008-06-04T14:00:00.004-04:00

As the U.S. assumes the presidency of the UN Security Council, President Bush must confront Sudan about its horrific obstructionist behavior and repeated attacks on the civilians in Darfur.

In 2004, the United States declared the atrocities in Darfur to be genocide. More than 400,000 have been killed and an estimated 2.5 million people have been displaced. Unfortunately, the crisis continues to escalate. Since the start of this year, the regime in Khartoum has carried out a series of attacks on civilians, including aerial bombardments of three West Darfur villages, which resulted in the deaths of hundreds of civilians. In addition, the Government of Sudan has continued to defy four separate UN Security Council Resolutions.

I strongly believe that the violent acts that have been inflicted upon the innocent people of Darfur must come to an end. No one should be forced to experience this terror. I will continue to stand up for the people living in the Darfur region and work to ensure that President Bush and the United Nations hear their cry and fights to protect Darfurians from these unjust acts.

I recently joined Representative Mike Capuano (MA-D) in sending a letter to Bush urging him to confront Sudan about their horrific actions. 55 bipartisan Members joined us and signed the letter. I hope that President Bush hears our cry and stands up for the victims of Darfur.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Thoughts on the VP Search

2008-05-29T00:54:00.001-04:00

During the past few weeks, both John McCain and Barack Obama have begun speaking with possible candidates for the Vice Presidency. They are presumably looking at a variety of factors as well as a background dossier on each individual to ensure to the greatest degree that there are no skeletons in the candidate's closet. What should McCain and Obama each be looking for in a Vice-Presidential running mate?

McCain needs to choose someone who is younger and well-schooled on the economy and other domestic issues. This person should also be acceptable to the religious right and, ideally, be a member of a minority group. Some names that come to mind are Bobby Jindal, the young Governor of Louisiana who is very conservative, has domestic policy experience, and is non-white; Mike Huckabee, the former Presidential candidate who has evangelical backing and comes from a humble, southern background; Charlie Crist, the charismatic Governor of Florida, who has a good grasp of domestic politics, is acceptable to the religious right, and is twenty or so years McCain’s junior; and finally, Mitt Romney, a Morman with strong backing from the right-wing of the Party and solid domestic experience.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Thoughts on the VP Search.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Energy Master Plan

2008-05-26T00:41:00.001-04:00

The Energy Master Plan
By: Assemblyman Upendra Chivukula

OVERVIEW

Governor Jon Corzine released the Energy Master Plan (EMP) to project the State’s energy outlook. The EMP evaluates a high-level view of energy issues - supply, demand, challenges associated with both supply, demand through the year 2020. Governor’s plan describes two alternatives that the State has on the road to energy issues - the “Business As Usual” scenario and the “Alternative Scenario” scenario.

TWO SCENARIOS

Within the “Business As Usual” scenario, the EMP has listed four substantive challenges:

1. Electricity supply is not keeping up with demand.
2. Energy prices have risen substantially in recent years and this trend is expected to continue.
3. Global Warming and the emission of greenhouse gases are expected to increase.
4. Today, New Jersey has much less authority over the supply and price of electricity than it did before the Electric Discount and Energy Competition Act (EDECA) of 1999.

New Jersey will have to be overcome the challenges identified above between 2008 and the year 2020. The “Business As Usual” scenario includes no State action in those intervening years.

The consequence of inaction is an estimated 60% increase in the total cost of energy consumed in 2020, as compared to 2005, totaling in excess of $26 billion. Greenhouse gas emissions in 2020 are predicted to be 14.5% higher than they were in 2006, thus negating many of the benchmarks established by the recently enacted “Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative Act”.

The “Alternative Scenario” however, outlines goals to change the way the State conducts its energy affairs. The “Alternative Scenario” lists five objectives, all involving State action:

1. Maximize energy conservation and efficiency.
2. Reduce New Jersey’s overall peak electricity demand.
3. Stimulate growth in renewable and alternative energy technologies.
4. Develop low-carbon emitting and more efficient power plants in order to close the gap between electricity supply and demand.
5. Invest in clean energy technologies and businesses to stimulate the industry’s growth within the State.

According to the Corzine Administration, implementation of these goals would result in a more secure, efficient, cleaner and safer New Jersey by the year 2020.

While the EMP document does present an alternative to the current state of energy management, decision-makers and key stakeholders need to consider additional avenues:

Financial – The cost of acquiring new technologies, funding rebates and incentives, and providing financing to industry and other economic outlays will be considerable. Further assessing the state of the national economy may also be valuable when formulating future energy policies.

Alternative and Renewable Energy Mix – The EMP document details the Governor’s version of an optimal energy matrix. Is this the right balance of energy options to bring New Jersey safely and efficiently into the second decade of the 21st century?

Green Collar Jobs – As a form of economic stimulation, creating and growing an entire new class of “green” New Jersey-based jobs would universally be considered a positive move. However, ensuring that such an initiative has staying power (either through policy or financial backing) would be of paramount importance.

Less Coal – Moving away from coal-based energy production and instead toward alternative and sustainable sources would help the State meet its commitment to reducing greenhouse gases and alleviate increasing global warming pressures. Currently, this strategy would conflict with PJM Interconnection and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) – the regulatory bodies that most impact the current energy composition of the State. PJM is a regional transmission organization that coordinates the movement of electricity in 13 mid-West and Mid-Atlantic States and the District of Columbia. Approximately 51 million Americans receive their power through PJM, including New Jersey residents. FERC is an independent federal agency that regulates the interstate transmission of natural gas, oil, and electricity and associated projects. These two organizations have their own thoughts and methods on energy procurement and distribution which at times, have placed them at odds with New Jersey’s best interests.

The Energy Master Plan has the potential to be one of the most influential roadmap for policy making in the State over the next several years.

Upendra Chivukula represents District 17 and serves as Deputy Speaker of the New Jersey General Assembly.

A Warning to Those Who Exercise Eminent Domain Powers

2008-05-22T00:56:00.000-04:00

Earlier this month, a three-judge panel upheld a decision awarding $18 million to the Halper family, former owners of a farm in Piscataway, New Jersey, which was taken by the Township through eminent domain. The Halpers had argued that they were entitled to the market value of the property when they had exhausted their legal options in 2004 while the Township sought to pay the family $4.3 million, the value of the property when the condemnation complaint was filed in 1999. The Court found that the Halpers were entitled to the market value of the property in 2004, holding that the legal actions undertaken by the family should not be used against them when determining the appropriate market value of the property.

The Panel’s decision sends a clear message to those who have the power to exercise eminent domain: this kind of procedure can be a financial risk. An entity that exercises the power must now worry a great deal more about an aggrieved property owner launching full-scale litigation to block the property’s sale, not only because of the costs of litigation but because, at least in a positive real estate market, the longer a property owner can drag out the litigation proceedings, the higher the payout from the entity exercising the eminent domain power. The corollary to this for property owners whose property becomes the subject of eminent domain proceedings is that a massive litigation fight might be worth it, not only for the principles involved but for the financial benefits that may accrue.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: A Warning to Those Who Exercise Eminent Domain Powers

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

National Breast Cancer Coalition

2008-05-20T16:01:00.004-04:00

Recently, I was honored by the National Breast Cancer Coalition (NBCC) with the Certificate of Excellence for supporting legislation which helps fight breast cancer. I am very proud to have the opportunity to work with organizations like the NBCC in hopes of moving closer to a cure and pleased to have a 100 percent voting record with the NBCC.

Breast cancer is a terrible disease—affecting both men and women. Because of its devastating impact I have been a strong advocate promoting breast cancer research. To this end, I have co-sponsored H.R. 1157, the Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Act. I am also pleased to be a strong supporter of increased funding for research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

I believe that we have made progress over the last few years fighting breast cancer, but much more can be done. I will continue to work with Congress, the health care facilities in the 5th district of New Jersey and organizations like the NBCC to eradicate breast cancer once and for all.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

The Debate Over Debates

2008-05-14T06:17:00.000-04:00

Congressman Rob Andrews, who is challenging Senator Frank Lautenberg in the Democratic Primary for the United States Senate in New Jersey, has demanded that Senator Lautenberg debate him seven times before the June Primary. Senator Lautenberg has accepted two debate invitations and declined all others, but has indicated he may agree to additional debates with Congressman Andrews before the Primary. Julie Roginsky, Mr. Lautenberg's campaign spokesperson, has said that the Senator is maintaining a full Senate schedule, which precludes him from participating in many debates. Are both Congressman Andrews and Senator Lautenberg playing politics?

The Senator probably should agree to at least one more debate before the June Primary, but the Congressman’s calls for many debates are inappropriate. When Senator Lautenberg was running against Republican Millicent Fenwick for the same Senate seat, he challenged her to a debate in each of New Jersey’s 21 counties. She agreed to five debates, but the Senator said that was insufficient and accused Ms. Fenwick of not being energetic enough, at the age of 72, to represent the State. However, the Lautenberg-Fenwick race was a general election evolving over many months, while the Lautenberg-Andrews race is a Primary election run over a few weeks. While debates are important and should be undertaken in both primary and general elections, having many debates in a Primary that lasts a few weeks is overreaching and would conceivably benefit only Congressman Andrews.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: The Debate Over Debates

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Why Commend Inclan?

2008-05-07T00:12:00.001-04:00

During the recent trial of David Delle Donna, the Mayor of Guttenberg, New Jersey, one of Governor Corzine’s deputy chiefs of staff, Javier Inclan, testified that he passed envelopes from a bar owner to the Mayor, which he believed to be filled with illegal cash campaign contributions. The Mayor and his wife were convicted on extortion and tax-related charges after being charged with accepting $40,000 worth of illegal gifts from that bar owner.

Is Mr. Inclan being charged, fired, or demoted in some manner? No. Instead, the Governor publicly commended him and a day later, Mr. Inclan resigned, with his pension and benefits fully intact. Yes, you read me right. Rather than publicly admonish Mr. Inclan for his role in this political corruption, the Governor, through his spokesman, Lilo Stanton, stated, "The governor commends Javier his effort and he believes it takes courage to testify in this trial…Javier was testifying in the case for the prosecution against someone who was clearly a convicted felon.” While it may take courage to testify in this trial, should the Governor be commending his deputy chief of staff for doing what any citizen should be doing anyway? Given Mr. Inclan’s role in the whole affair, it would seem that testifying was the very least he could do to aid the prosecution.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Why Commend Inclan?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

2008 Environmental Quality Awardee Marie Springer

2008-05-05T16:58:00.007-04:00

Last week, I recognized my constituent Marie Springer for her environmental efforts and achievements in New Jersey. In recognition of this work, Ms. Springer was recently awarded the 2008 Environmental Quality Award by the United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Marie Springer has been an influential individual in New Jersey, leading the charge to preserve and protect our natural heritage for generations to come. As the founder of Friends of Wallkill River, Ms. Springer made the conservation of open spaces an important cause to many Northwest New Jerseyans. I appreciate, and am extremely grateful for, the hard work and dedication that Marie has poured into making our community a better place.

As a leading advocate of open space preservation, I believe it’s important to seek a balance between the protection of New Jersey’s natural heritage with the protection of our constitutional heritage of private property rights. I have authored legislation, which became law, which included the Musconetcong River in the national network of Wild and Scenic rivers.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Supporting our Nation's Veterans

2008-05-02T15:13:00.002-04:00

Last week, I joined U.S. Senator Robert Menendez in supporting our nation’s veterans by pushing legislation which would expand the federal burial benefit to assist veterans’ family members buried in state veterans’ cemeteries. I introduced this bill in November of last year and Sen. Menendez recently introduced it in the Senate.

I believe that this legislation is a commonsense approach to supporting our veterans and addressing their needs. This year, our nation will lay to rest military personnel who have risked their lives for our country and beliefs. The families of these brave individuals should be able to choose their burial based on location, convenience, and peace of mind, not economics.

My bill would enable veterans to receive burial benefits to cover the veteran’s spouse and other eligible dependents when buried in state veteran’s cemeteries. Currently, burial benefits are available for a veteran when he or she is buried in either a federal or state veteran’s cemetery. A veteran’s spouse and dependents are eligible for benefits only when they are buried with the veteran in a federal cemetery. This disparity forces a veteran’s family to bear the burden of financing the burial themselves if they want to keep the family together in a state cemetery. Given that state veterans cemetery space is more abundant than federal veterans cemetery space, and that federal cemeteries are often more regional and less convenient to remote areas of the country, families are frequently left without real options.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Scoring Points!

2008-04-30T00:09:00.000-04:00

Earlier this month, Senator Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex), Chair of the State Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, scored points for fiscal responsibility and common sense by advocating the elimination of pension credit for part-time government employees. This past week, she scored a touchdown when she pledged to reject any attempts to insert “Christmas Tree items” into the budget for the new fiscal year beginning July 1. She also proposed the restoration of $62 million in proposed cuts in municipal aid, including $37 million in eliminated tax relief for towns with fewer than 10,000 residents.

So-called “Christmas Tree items” are typically inserted by legislators during the final phase of the budget process to provide money for pet projects of that legislator. Usually, the projects will benefit the legislator politically and will benefit supporters of the legislator financially. “Christmas Tree items” inflate our State budget by tens of millions of dollars every year, costing our taxpayers unnecessarily. Senator Buono’s pledge to reject all “Christmas Tree items” is not only welcome but should be adopted by every legislator.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Scoring Points!

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Administration's Recent Shift Towards Sudan

2008-04-24T10:42:00.004-04:00

Today, I joined several of my colleagues to condemn the Bush Administration’s recent shift in policy towards Sudan.

I am proud that the United States was one of the largest international humanitarian and peacekeeping supporters in Sudan and Darfur, but the recent actions by the Administration are completely unacceptable.

The United States should not be meeting with Nafi Ali Nafi, the man responsible for many of Sudan’s domestic atrocities and a link to international terrorism. Meetings like this send the wrong message to the international community and terrorist organizations.

I will continue to condemn these actions and speak out for the oppressed people of Sudan and Darfur while in Congress.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Reining In Out-of-Control Spending

2008-04-23T00:08:00.001-04:00

As New Jersey copes with its increasing budget woes, perhaps the Legislature should consider several measures that would help reduce out-of-control spending: unannounced audits and the elimination or transformation of pension credit for part-time government work.

A bill sponsored by Assemblyman Jon Bramnick (R) currently languishing in the State Legislature, A-222, would require the Office of the State Auditor to perform unannounced audits of any program of a State or State-supported agency as long as such an audit is requested by any member of the Legislature.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Reining In Out-of-Control Spending.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Washington Must Decrease Spending

2008-04-17T13:26:00.007-04:00

Earlier this week, I joined several of my colleagues to offer a piece of legislation that would help to decrease federal spending. The Spending Limit Amendment, which was created by the Republican Study Committee, would limit federal spending each year to the growth of America’s economy, capping spending at 20 percent of the Gross Domestic Product.

I strongly believe that it’s long past time that the overspending in Washington comes to an end. New Jersey’s hardworking taxpayers should not have to bear the burden for the gross misuse of government funds. This year we witnessed the passage of a $683 billion tax increase to pay for Washington’s out-of-control spending habits. America’s middle class and small businesses should not be the ones taking the financial hit.

This legislation would prohibit federal spending from growing faster than nominal GDP, capping it at 20 percent of GDP and require the President’s annual budget submission to have an overall spending total that complies with the spending limit. It would give Congress the authority to enforce and implement this article by appropriate legislation and the ability to waive the limit for any year that a declaration of war is in effect. Also, this bill allows Congress to suspend the limit for any reason with a two-thirds vote of both Houses. The Spending Limit Amendment helps Washington grow up and take responsibility for its actions. When you don’t have money to spend, stop spending; don’t steal from the pockets of our nation’s families.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Why Mrs. Andrews?

2008-04-16T00:20:00.000-04:00

Last week, Camille Andrews, wife of Congressman and candidate for the United States Senate Rob Andrews, was selected to be on the June Primary ballot as the Democratic candidate for her husband’s seat in Congress. Is Mrs. Andrews qualified to serve in Congress? Absolutely. Is her selection a wise political move? Absolutely not. In fact, the selection of Mrs. Andrews to run for Congress undermines her husband’s insurgent campaign.

By all accounts, Camille Andrews is certainly qualified to serve in Congress and would likely be a solid member for the residents of District 1 and the State of New Jersey. She is an Associate Dean at Rutgers School of Law-Camden, teaches several classes at the law school and serves as a faculty advisor to the Rutgers Law Review. She is a former partner at Dilworth Paxson and was a star law school and undergraduate student prior to her work at the firm. She also serves on a number of community boards, including the New Jersey Cares Board.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Why Mrs. Andrews?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

China and the Summer Olympics

2008-04-10T11:11:00.000-04:00

I’m a fan of the Olympic Games. My family and I look forward to watching individuals from all over the world compete for the gold in Beijing, China. I am always proud of our nation’s athletes; they have worked tirelessly for the chance to participate. But recently I’m extremely frustrated with the Chinese government’s detestable human rights decisions.

I believe it is horrific that China supports Sudan’s genocidal regime, persecutes citizens for practicing religion, and denies basic freedoms to their own people. These oppressive actions must be stopped.

I recently signed onto HR 5668, a bill that would require President Bush and other American politicians to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympics. I believe this sends a crucial message to China, and other nations—the United States will not tolerate oppressive actions that prohibit freedom. This bill does not punish the athletes who have spent hours upon hours training for various events. And it does not prohibit them from competing.

For the victims in China, I hope President Bush hears us.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Communicating with New Jersey Legislators Via E-mail

2008-04-09T00:05:00.001-04:00

According to the Office of Legislative Services, the only way for residents of New Jersey to contact Legislators by email is through an online form available on the website for the New Jersey State Legislature, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/ The online form has a number of significant problems that make it unnecessarily difficult for residents to use. Because of these problems, I asked the Office of Legislative Services for the email addresses of our State Legislators so that I could contact them without using the online form. The Office told me that the email addresses for the Legislators are not available to the public “because of severe spamming problems” and therefore “the form is the current protocol.”

If a resident wishes to contact his Legislator via email, he currently needs to go to the Legislature’s website, http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/ If he knows his Legislator’s name, he can use the roster available on the site to get to a webpage that allows him to fill out an online form to send a message to the Legislator. If he does not know the elected official’s name, the resident can locate him as long as he knows either the municipality or election district in which that resident lives. Fair enough. On to filling out the form…

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Communicating with New Jersey Legislators Via E-mail

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

It is Time to “Change Congress”

2008-04-02T07:46:00.001-04:00

This past month, Stanford Law Professor Larry Lessig and Joe Trippi, former campaign manager for Howard Dean and senior advisor to John Edwards in their runs for the White House, teamed up to form “Change Congress,” a national movement to help end corruption in the United States Congress (www.change-congress.org). The organization is advocating for several important measures that will help reform Washington, asks all candidates to pledge to undertake these reforms, and encourages citizens to promote these important issues by agreeing to a similar pledge.

First, “Change Congress” asks candidates running for Congress to pledge not to accept lobbyist or PAC money. Second, it advocates for an end to Congressional earmarks in order to eliminate wasteful government spending. Third, the organization demands transparency in Washington including having members of Congress publicly disclose meetings with registered lobbyists, earmark requests, and other such reforms. Last, “Change Congress” seeks publicly financed campaigns to end the corrosive influence of campaign contributions to the political process.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: It's Time to "Change Congress."

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Tax Day is Coming

2008-04-01T13:23:00.002-04:00

April 15th is Tax Day, the day when income taxes for American residents are due. The daunting task of filing taxes is dreaded by many. Unfortunately, for an increasing number of middle class families, the task has become even harder. And, that’s because an increasing number of middle class families will find themselves subject to the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).

The AMT is an outdated and onerous tax which is not indexed to inflation. It affects millions of tax payers each year and that doesn’t have to be the case. Last year, I re-introduced my AMT Middle Class Fairness Act, which would index the AMT to inflation and allow a state and local tax deduction against the AMT.

As a New Jerseyan you are already paying too much in taxes; the AMT shouldn’t be added onto your costs. Congress needs to make fixing the AMT a priority. We need to turn the focus of Washington to the family budget and not the federal one.

Rep. Scott Garrett represents the 5th district of New Jersey.

Fewer Foxes Guarding the Henhouse

2008-03-26T00:35:00.000-04:00

At the beginning of last week, the New Jersey State Senate approved legislation that would ban members of the Legislature from serving on the Joint Legislative Committee on Ethical Standards, the Committee that investigates allegations of ethical impropriety made against current legislators. The bill mandates that all members of the Committee be chosen from the public and reduces the size of the Committee by one-half. A maximum of two Committee people can be former legislators. The filing of complaints within 90 days of an election is prohibited, as well. While this is not legislation that will completely reform New Jersey politics, it is a step in the right direction. Unfortunately, several other bills that would have further reformed New Jersey politics were shelved by the Democratic majority in the Legislature at the end of last week.

For too long, legislators serving on the Joint Legislative Committee on Ethical Standards have neutered the Committee to protect their own. The Committee rarely met and when it did, it gave, at best, a slap on the wrist to the most egregious of ethical offenders.Could anything else be expected when foxes are guarding the proverbial henhouse?

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Fewer Foxes Guarding the Henhouse.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Lieutenant Governor: No Longer a Patronage Job

2008-03-19T00:20:00.000-04:00

Last week's rapid decline of Governor Eliot Spitzer and this week's elevation of Lieutenant Governor David Patterson to the highest office in New York State Government bear important lessons for New Jersey politics. Voters will elect the first Lieutenant Governor of the State in 2009, when Governor Corzine runs for re-election. The Lieutenant Governor will not run in a primary since the gubernatorial candidates will choose their respective Lieutenant Governor running mates thirty days after the Primary. The Governor will run with the Lieutenant Governor on a single ticket for the same term of office. Names previously bandied about for the spot in New Jersey are not heavy-weights by any sense of the word but rather are representatives of large constituencies in areas key to Democratic or Republican success in State elections. With Spitzer's fall from grace, the possibility of having a Lieutenant Governor in New Jersey become the Governor is very real, especially to New Jersey voters.

Where the Lieutenant Governor position could have been filled with a political patronage hack pre-Spitzer, voters will now demand better. Politicians in the State can no longer view the Lieutenant Governor role as simply ceremonial and powerless. Therefore, they will vie for the position and competitive campaigning will likely take place, if not visibly, at least internally amongst Party regulars. Candidates for Lieutenant Governor will not only have to be qualified but will have to prove they are able to lead the State on Day One should the Governor have to abdicate his office.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Lieutenant Governor: No Longer a Patronage Job.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Long Slog Ahead

2008-03-12T00:12:00.000-04:00

Hillary Clinton’s strong showing in Ohio’s primary coupled with a victory in the populous state of Texas has re-energized her flagging campaign and ensured that the race for the Democratic nomination will go into April and, most likely, even longer. The problem for the Democrats is that the longer the race goes on, the more expensive, as well as more competitive and negative it will also become, perhaps irreparably tarnishing whoever will win the Democratic nomination. These issues may well turn off the newly-engaged first-time voters who have been so numerous in the Democratic primaries this year. On the other hand, Senator McCain has the opportunity to limit his spending and, at the same time, throw punches at the Democratic candidates while he is insulated from attacks by those in his own party, enabling him to continue to maintain his high positive ratings while the approval ratings of Obama and Clinton fall. A shop-worn nominee, a divided Democratic Party, and an independently-minded Republican nominee with high approval ratings spell trouble for the Democrats in November.

The long slog ahead will do great damage to Democrats’ hopes for November and may so polarize the Party’s voters that the eventual nominee is unable to garner the kind of support typical of nominees of the Party. While many would like to see the race for the nomination concluded so that all energies can be focused on the general election, this does not appear to be in the cards.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: The Long Slog Ahead.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Freedom of the Press -- The Victor!

2008-03-05T00:45:00.001-05:00

In January, the Student Government Association (SGA) at Montclair State University (MSU), under the leadership of SGA President Ron Chicken, stopped funding for the MSU student newspaper, The Montclarion. The SGA took this drastic step because the newspaper had used its SGA-funded attorney, Sal Anderton, to pursue action against the SGA for holding closed meetings allegedly in violation of the Open Public Meetings Act. In addition to freezing funding for the paper, the SGA also fired Anderton and demanded the newspaper use the SGA’s attorney, Aaron Easley. As part of the SGA’s requirement that the newspaper use Mr. Easley, Mr. Chicken also required the newspaper to submit legal inquiries for Easley through Mr. Chicken and was not permitted access to Mr. Easley directly. Hmmm.

Fortunately, while the dispute was being mediated, funding was unfrozen to allow for publication of the newspaper. This past week, the administration at MSU, led by MSU President Susan Cole, determined that the newspaper should not be financially dependent on the SGA because it is important for the press and the government to remain as separate and independent entities. As a result, President Cole has agreed to work with the newspaper and the SGA to separate them by the summer. In addition, Dr. Cole has committed to finding an independent funding source for the newspaper.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Freedom of the Press -- The Victor!

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Corzine, Like Clinton, Only With More Time to Turn It Around

2008-02-26T00:03:00.007-05:00

With fewer than two weeks before the Texas and Ohio primaries, Hillary Clinton does not have much time to turn around her sagging campaign. With polls showing that her unfavorable ratings are continuing to climb and her approval ratings are in a slow but steady decline, the Senator from New York has to mastermind a miracle, and quickly. Across the Hudson, Governor Corzine faces similar polling numbers, but time is on his side. Unfortunately, the Governor must also transform himself but has not shown adeptness at doing so.

This past week, the Quinnipiac poll showed the Governor with a 37% job approval rating and a whopping 52% disapproval. In addition, 51% of the voters polled said he did not deserve re-election and his approval among members of his own party is only at 53%. With continued wrangling over an unpopular toll hike still ahead, the Governor will see his support continue to dwindle in the weeks ahead. However, all is not lost and the Governor does have time to regroup.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Corzine, Like Clinton, Only With More Time to Turn It Around.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Is Obama Inevitable?

2008-02-20T00:46:00.000-05:00

Approximately a month ago, the pundits were entranced by the inevitability argument promulgated by the Clinton Campaign, believing the spoon-fed line that Hillary Clinton was the heir to the White House “throne” and unbeatable. Something has happened since then, actually a lot: The Clinton juggernaut has revealed itself to be a house of cards. Her prodigious fundraising has been unmasked as a traditional operation that basked in the glow of large donors whose contributions have now largely maxed out, leaving the once behemoth campaign struggling for dollars. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton’s high-powered (and expensive) political team has shown itself to be adept at shooting the candidate in the foot by promoting her as a candidate of experience when the American electorate is looking for an end to the status quo in Washington. At the same time, her charge that Senator Obama was the weaker of the two general election candidates and that he could not appeal to whites and particularly women has been undercut by recent polls. These polls show the Senator from Illinois with a lead over the presumptive Republican nominee, John McCain, while Mrs. Clinton is behind, tied with, or one point ahead of the Senator from Arizona depending on the particular poll. Senator Obama also won over Clinton in North Dakota, Utah, Kansas and other states not known for their diversity, and was significantly victorious over Clinton in the Potomac primaries, receiving a majority of the women’s vote over the Senator from New York.

With super-delegates pledged to Clinton now changing course, unions who were remaining neutral now siding with Obama, newspaper endorsements in favor of the Senator from Illinois continuing unabated, and near endless press coverage regarding the possible collapse of the vaunted Clinton machine, the New York Senator has now become the underdog. The Clinton Campaign shakeup this past week did not help matters, instilling fear in donors and other supporters that the campaign is in deep trouble. At the same time, it provided a sense of near panic to a public that wants reassurance from the former First Lady that she is calm and cool under pressure.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Is Obama Inevitable?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Governor’s Toll Road Plan Under Heavy Fire

2008-02-13T00:37:00.000-05:00

Governor Corzine’s plan to use toll hikes to pay down the State debt has come under heavy fire in recent days. A few weeks ago, it looked more likely to pass than not, with many Democrats in the Legislature expressing support and the endorsement of the pro-business Chambers of Commerce. However, this past week, all 17 Republican State Senators and all 32 Republican Assemblymen signaled that they would oppose the plan. Since the Democrats have a majority in both Legislative houses, the Republican opposition was not a deal-breaker. However, State Senator John Adler, a prominent Democrat who is running for Congress, announced his opposition, as well. In addition, a group of environmental and transportation groups declared their rejection of the Governor’s plan as long as it continues to include widening some major roadways. Suddenly, the asset monetization plan looks dead on arrival.

The toll hike plan calls for increasing tolls substantially over the next decade and using the money to pay down the State’s debt, establish a transportation trust fund, and widen several major roadways through the use of bonds. Paying down the debt is critical to the long-term future of our State. Interest on the State’s debt could cripple New Jersey’s economy in the coming years should it not be dealt with promptly. However, whether significantly increasing tolls to accomplish the task is the best way to go is questionable. Furthermore, if the State is in such massive debt, why does the Governor’s plan call for spending $4 billion (yes, with a “b”) to widen roadways? In addition, why does all of the pain for paying down New Jersey’s debt have to fall on drivers?

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Governor's Toll Road Plan Under Heavy Fire

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

What About al Qaeda?

2008-02-07T00:41:00.000-05:00

As we approach another Presidential election, the terrorist menace facing our nation and the world has fallen in prominence in polls and in the news. Meanwhile, its network, which was in place on 9/11, has grown considerably in the past seven years and, thanks to the misguided and badly bungled war in Iraq, has many new recruits. With our economy teetering on the brink of recession, the war in Iraq devolving into a debate about the surge, and a Presidential election taking all of the oxygen out of the public debate, it is understandable that terrorism has faded from the nation's consciousness. This, however, is a very dangerous trend that must be reversed by our elected leaders on both sides of the aisle. The terrorist threat is real, not imagined, and should be fought with vigilance.

Anyone who thinks this menace is passé need only look at last week's bombing in a Baghdad market that killed at least 99 people and wounded over 200. Two mentally retarded women had explosives strapped to them, which were detonated remotely by al Qaeda. The women likely had no idea what they were doing and that they were about to be sent to their deaths. The sheer depravity of this act is shocking.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: What About al Qaeda?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Will He or Won't He?

2008-01-31T00:53:00.000-05:00

Although repeatedly denying he will run for President in 2008, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg reportedly has a bevy of campaign strategists, including ballot experts, advising him on a potential Presidential run. Sources close to the Mayor have said that he will run only if he thinks he can win and that he would not enter the race to be a spoiler or for the purpose of getting the major political parties to address issues of concern to him. So will he or won't he?

If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee and Mitt Romney is the Republican nominee, look for Bloomberg to enter. Both are divisive figures who practice scorched-earth politics and have little ability to attract either Independents or voters of the opposing party. A Clinton/Romney race would open the door to a third-party candidate who could appeal to all shades of Democrats, moderate Republicans, and Independents.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Will He or Won't He?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Hillary Clinton’s Campaign – A Foreshadow of her Presidency?

2008-01-23T00:58:00.000-05:00

First it was Hillary Clinton’s New Hampshire Co-Chair Billy Shaheen, then Clinton pollster and top strategist Mark Penn, and finally BET Television Founder and prominent Clinton supporter Bob Johnson, who raised the question of drug use by Barack Obama WHILE HE WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL. Clinton surrogates have continued to fan the flames. Could this be an attempt by that campaign to scare voters into changing their support from Obama to Clinton? The “drug use” attack against Obama has worked: his momentum has slowed and Mrs. Clinton is now ahead in key states. Interestingly, the Clinton supporters raising the issue of Obama’s drug use did not question Bill Clinton’s use of drugs post-high school or his excuse that he did not inhale. If it were just the “drug use” attack, perhaps it could be forgiven. However, other tactics employed by Clinton allies and Mrs. Clinton herself raise troubling questions as to whether her possible presidency would employ similar strategies.

The recent Martin Luther King/Lyndon Johnson controversy in which the Clintons themselves injected racial politics into the Democratic race by downplaying Barack Obama’s achievements; the mysterious robocalls to primary voters falsely claiming that Barack Obama is a Muslim who was educated in a radical madrassa; or the lawsuit filed by the Nevada Teacher’s Union, a key Clinton ally, to try to overturn decisions made regarding polling locations that had been supported by the Clinton campaign when they were 25% ahead in Nevada -- these kinds of political tactics are emblematic of what is wrong with politics and why so many Americans are apathetic.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Hillary Clinton's Campaign -- A Foreshadow of her Presidency?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Party Democracy Act -- a Step in the Right Direction

2008-01-17T19:01:00.000-05:00

The Party Democracy Act, sponsored by New Jersey State Senators Diane Allen (R) and Loretta Weinberg (D), is a step in the right direction. How the major County political parties operate in New Jersey is largely unknown. Yet, they have a great deal of power, including the ability to fill legislative vacancies as they arise. Reform is needed to create more openness and accountability of our County political parties.

The Party Democracy Act requires all County political parties to have by-laws and a constitution that are available to all Committeepeople within 48 hours of being requested. Currently, a number of County parties do not have by-laws or a constitution; therefore, the rules can be established (and potentially manipulated) by the County Chairperson so that his/her preferred candidate or position can rule the day. Having written by-laws and a constitution will afford all Committeepeople a level playing field in which to exercise their rights and obligations.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: The Party Democracy Act -- a Step in the Right Direction.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Answer is Not to Raise Taxes on Already High Prices at the Pump

2008-01-16T18:27:00.000-05:00

By: Representative Scott Garrett

Yesterday, the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission released a report calling for a massive gas tax increase. This proposed tax hike would raise gas prices up to 40 cents per gallon within five years and as much as 91 cents in 20 years.

Once again American taxpayers are expected to foot the bill for Washington’s addictive tax and spend habits. Increasing gas taxes is not the answer to our transportation woes. Legislators need to work to spend current funds smarter on needed repairs and improvements. Too much is wasted now on pet transportation projects, photo opportunities and pork barrel spending.

I commend Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters and the two other dissenting commissioners who took a strong stance against this absurd proposal. It is my hope that Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle will also fight this tax hike at the pump and work instead to spend transportation funds in a responsible manner which actually benefits the commuters on the road.

Since coming to Washington, I have called for creative solutions to our nation’s transportation troubles. During consideration of SAFETEA-LU, I fought for report language to encourage this Commission to consider alternatives to taxes for funding infrastructure improvements. I’ve also authored legislation, the STATE (Surface Transportation and Taxation Equity) Act, which returns primary responsibility for transportation and infrastructure projects back to the states without increasing taxes. My bill would give states the ability to prioritize projects based on safety, traffic needs, and improved commerce instead of being subject to federal mandates and earmarks. The STATE Act has received praise from the CATO Institute, Heritage Foundation, Americans for Prosperity, and National Taxpayers Union, as well as Secretary Peters.

Codey and Roberts Reform Plan -- Last Chance Before Voters Look Elsewhere

2008-01-09T00:01:00.000-05:00

Senate President Richard Codey (D-Essex) and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden) have announced that they will unite in an attempt to pass meaningful reform legislation in 2008. We’ve heard similar rhetoric before from both sides of the political aisle in Trenton. It may be suggested that this is the final opportunity for the Democratic Party in New Jersey before voters look elsewhere. The newly-elected Republicans have established a united front for similar reform; therefore, if the Democrats in the Legislature sabotage this reform effort, the Republicans will either pass such reform during this legislative term or be stymied and, because of voter outrage, secure enough seats in 2009 to enable such reform to be enacted. The Democrats would be wise to enact the Codey/Roberts ethics-related reforms now, before it is too late.

Codey and Roberts have proposed creating “Pay to Play” reform that is “loophole free.” Currently, “Pay to Play” reforms that have been enacted are circumvented throughout New Jersey by special interests, contract seekers, and operatives in both political parties. All loopholes need to be closed to ensure that contracts are awarded based on merit and not payback for political contributions.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Codey and Roberts Reform Plan -- Last Chance Before Voters Look Elsewhere.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

New Jersey’s Abolition of the Death Penalty

2008-01-02T22:56:00.000-05:00

With recent polls showing more than half of the residents of New Jersey support the death penalty, it was a bit surprising to see the Legislature abolish it and the Governor concur. In support of its abolition, there are the moral and religious issues that one should never kill another human being. Also, studies show that the financial cost of maintaining the death penalty surpasses the cost of life imprisonment and that such punishment does not serve much of a deterrent purpose. Since New Jersey had not executed anyone in over thirty years, the death penalty had basically already been abolished in this State. However, putting that aside, is justice being done? Arguably for horrific violent crimes, it may be suggested that justice is being denied.

Granted, we do not live in an eye-for-an-eye society, but when it comes to particularly violent crimes, should the criminal be allowed to live his life when he has denied another theirs? A good case in point is that of Megan Kanka. Jesse Timmendequas, a repeat violent sex offender, kidnapped, raped and murdered 7-year-old Megan Kanka. The national outcry that this case caused resulted in the passage of Megan’s Law, an attempt to protect communities from sexual predators. With the abolishment of the death penalty, Mr. Timmendequas will now serve life in prison without any fear of execution.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: New Jersey's Abolition of the Death Penalty

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

New Year’s Resolutions for Garden State Government

2007-12-27T06:48:00.000-05:00

It’s the time of the year when we reflect on the past year and make our resolutions for the new one. Because we can never be sure that our elected officials do reflect on the past and vow to make changes in the New Year, here are some resolutions that our representatives in Garden State government would do well to make and keep.

As New Jersey’s deficit skyrockets, the first resolution for the New Year should be to develop a fiscally responsible budget that cuts wasteful spending even if it means that the politicians will not be able to bring as much “pork-barrel” spending to their districts. State programs should be aggressively audited to root out waste, fraud and abuse. All unnecessary paid political appointees should be dismissed. All last-minute budget appropriations should be refused.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: New Year's Resolutions for Garden State Government

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Why Not Consider the Rutgers Stadium Funding Concept for Professional Sports?

2007-12-19T22:07:00.000-05:00

Time and again our State’s residents are told that professional sports teams will pay the full cost of stadium construction and are promised that no public funding will be used in the process. Yet, nearly every time our taxpayers wind up handing over big bucks to subsidize these professional stadium projects while team owners compete to see who can raise player salaries the highest. Our government in New Jersey has consistently played along and expressed surprise when suddenly our taxpayers are left with a bill that some politician attempts to explain in some convoluted manner. While not a situation involving a professional sports team, the recent plan announced to fund the expansion of the Rutgers stadium should be studied as a model for professional sports projects.

As recently reported, Rutgers had been seeking state funding for a stadium expansion, in the neighborhood of $100M. Last week, Governor Corzine informed Rutgers that the state money would not be forthcoming, a fiscally wise decision given our State’s skyrocketing debt. Instead, Governor Corzine is teaming up with Senator Ray Lesniak and other Rutgers alums to privately raise $30M to help fund the stadium expansion.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Why Not Consider the Rutgers Stadium Funding Concept for Professional Sports?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

If I’m Either of the Johns or Fred…

2007-12-12T22:50:00.000-05:00

If I’m John Edwards or John McCain or Fred Thompson, I’m feeling pretty good right now. I’m slightly behind the front runners in my Party and the folks who are ahead of me are engaging in an all-out negative assault against each other. That’s where John Edwards and John McCain find themselves in both Iowa and New Hampshire and where Fred Thompson finds himself in South Carolina, the first few key presidential primary states. If I’m either of the Johns or Fred, I run a positive, issue-based campaign through the South Carolina Primary and let the front runners continue to attack each other between now and then.

On the Democratic side, the seemingly unstoppable Hillary Clinton has run into a major problem: the two most appealing factors driving voters to her, her inevitability as the nominee and her ability to beat the Republican nominee, have been eliminated. She is no longer in the lead in Iowa with her likeability registering only in the low 20’s while in head-to-head matchups with possible Republican opponents, she is losing against nearly every choice. Meanwhile, Barack Obama has become the front runner in Iowa and is closing in fast on Mrs. Clinton in New Hampshire. During the past few weeks, these two candidates, who once publicly abhorred negative campaigning, are trading negative barbs on a daily basis. If John Edwards, currently running a close third in both Iowa and New Hampshire, runs a positive campaign from here on out, he will pick up a few points from weak Clinton supporters and a few points from weak Obama supporters. He can then catapult into the lead in both states, leaving Obama in second, and Clinton finishing third in both contests. Then the candidates head south where Clinton’s support is weaker and where both Edwards and Obama can flourish. The end result: the campaign becomes a contest between Obama and Edwards but leaving Clinton as a potential kingmaker (and possible VP or Secretary of State), since whoever she endorses at that point would likely win the Democratic nomination.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: If I’m Either of the Johns or Fred…

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Mandates Hurt the Economy

2007-12-08T09:54:00.000-05:00

By: Murray Sabrin

“No Worker should have to choose between caring for their loved ones and paying their bills.” That’s the mantra of the paid family leave (PFL) proponents who have scheduled a rally in Trenton on December 10 to push the Legislature in passing a paid-family leave bill by the end of the year.

The goal of mandated paid-family leave legislation is laudable. Taking time off to care for a sick relative without facing a huge financial burden is a worthy social goal. However, there are dozens of worthwhile initiatives that could make New Jersey a better place to live and work. Must they be mandated by the State?

That is the crux of the issue. Can we have an attractive business environment that will provide high paying jobs and a growing standard of living for New Jersey’s labor force with more and more state government mandates? Or, should employee benefits be negotiated at the bargaining table between workers or their union representatives and management?

The answers to these questions reveal if you embrace coercion or freedom. Moreover, there will be long-term negative consequences for New Jersey’s economy if a paid-family leave mandate is passed by the Legislature and signed by Governor Corzine. Although the initial tax, let’s not forget another tax on employees will fund PFL, is “minor,” averaging one dollar per week per employee, the rate will inevitably rise in the future.

That is the history of all federal and state entitlement programs. Start with a low tax and in a few years and decades later most workers pay more in these taxes than do in income taxes. Just look at the history of Social Security and Medicare taxes. They have skyrocketed since they were enacted in 1935 and 1965, respectively. And these programs are financially unsustainable unless they get a huge infusion of higher taxes on working people in the years and decades ahead.

In the final analysis, the law is not supposed to create a social welfare state, despite the rhetoric of the governor and other members of the Legislature who see virtually every human need as an excuse to tax, spend and borrow.

New Jersey’s economy has a strong foundation. However, the political elite in Trenton unwittingly are undermining New Jersey’s future prosperity for short-term political gain. With Governor Corzine and his fellow Democrats firmly in charge of the Statehouse, paid family leave should be a shoo-in after Monday’s demonstration. When the governor signs a paid-family leave bill, he also will be signing away New Jersey’s long term economic competitiveness.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business and executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also blogs for the Star-Ledger, www.nj.com/njvoices. Sabrin writes a weekly column every Monday for www.usadaily.com.

School Aid Plan Raises Questions

2007-12-06T00:27:00.000-05:00

The school aid plan that is slowly being leaked to the public and being reported on by the media continues a trend of increasingly distributing state aid based on each school district’s wealth while taking away aid from so called “wealthy” school districts. As a result, property taxes, the majority of which is used to fund public education, will likely increase in wealthy areas while many "Abbott" districts no longer needing such funding continue to reap the benefits. The plan as presented in recent media coverage is flawed on several levels:

First, despite the growing wealth of several of the 31 Abbott districts, including Hoboken, all 31 will continue to have "Abbott" status under the plan and are guaranteed to continue receiving special State aid at the same level or more than they are currently receiving. Why should a place like Hoboken, with a burgeoning upper middle class, continue to have Abbott status and further, why should New Jersey taxpayers continue to subsidize its funding at the current level? Hoboken and other Abbott districts similar to Hoboken should be removed from the Abbott classification or its residents should pay their fair share to educate their children.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: School Aid Plan Raises Questions.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

McCain, Rudy, Huckabee, Ron Paul and the truth

2007-12-01T09:20:00.000-05:00

By: Murray Sabrin

If you have been watching the GOP presidential debates, you know there are eight candidates still in the race. (Alan Keyes would make nine but no one takes him seriously anymore.)

In last Wednesday’s CNN YouTube Debate, American submitted questions on video, which were then screened by the cable network. Some of the questions focused on the Bible, the Confederate flag, and other irrelevant issues.

In light of the financial crisis gripping the country, the plunging value do the U.S. dollar overseas, the unsustainability of the federal government’s entitlement programs, the nearly five year occupation of Iraq, the on again off again drumbeat for war with Iran, one would think the producers of a presidential primary debate would have chosen questions that would address the issues that have the greatest impact on the American people’s freedom, liberties, and prosperity. And, of course, there is no more important question than war and peace.

Instead, CNN hosted a debate that was a great disappointment, especially since the so-called top-tier candidates received most of the air time. Nevertheless, several candidates gave revealing answers aimed at spinning their positions to attract votes from the GOP base.

Senator McCain got rave reviews from the mainstream media because of his forceful support of the Iraq invasion and his unflinching support for the surge which he claims “is working.” Just ask the troops, he asserted during the debate. McCain was in Iraq on Thanksgiving and claimed that the troops told him “they just want to win.” Win what?

Saddam Hussein is dead, the infrastructure is in shambles, sectarian violence continues, American troops still patrol the streets playing the role of foreign policemen, and McCain still thinks the American invasion of Iraq was a vital strategic initiative in the “war on terror.” And the cost of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are approaching $2 TRILLION.

Also, Senator McCain accused the only anti-war candidate on the stage, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, that his “isolationist” policies were responsible for the rise of Hitler!!!!!

Dr. Paul refuted McCain’s idiotic statement by pointing out that he is an advocate of nointerventionism, a proponent of trade, diplomacy, cultural exchanges, i.e., peaceful relations with other nations. In short, a policy that the Founders argued to be in the best interests of the country in order to stay out of endless conflicts overseas.

Senator McCain should drop out of the race before he embarrasses himself, his family and the people of Arizona, again and again in his ranting and ravings. He should check himself into a VA hospital so the good doctors can determine what parallel universe he is living in, because the senator from Arizona thinks America has enemies everywhere. Paranoia is a serious condition.

Yes, we were attacked on September 11, 2001, not because we are Americans, but as former Bush administration officials, astute foreign policy analysts and bin Laden himself has said, U.S. intervention in the Middle Ease caused retaliation against America’s interventionist foreign policy. In other words, on 9/11 we were not attacked by Iraq or any other nation, but by a criminal gang. Ron Paul has made this point throughout the campaign. McCain should do his homework. “Blowback” occurred on 9/11.

Rudy Giuliani was on the defensive in the debate, because of his pro-illegal immigrant policies as mayor and his support in the past for comprehensive gun control. Despite Rudy’s so-called leadership during and after the September 11th attacks, the shining armor of “America’s mayor” is getting tarnished for too many reasons to enumerate here.

Suffice it to say, in a question about restoring America in the eyes of the Muslim world, Rudy gave a Ron Paul type answer. His Honor said America should trade, have cultural exchanges with the Muslim world, because the Muslim highjackers on 9/11 do not represent the Muslim people or the Muslim religion.

So why does Rudy refer to the hijackers and their movement as “Islamofascism” since they do not have a state? Why does he refer to the terrorists as “Islamic terrorists”? Why doesn’t he identify them as Middle Eastern terrorists? Or, Saudi Arabian terrorist, since virtually all the terrorists were from Saudi Arabia?

Rudy is the candidate of fear, corruption, and a proponent of the welfare-warfare state. In short, he may be the worst candidate the GOP could nominate for president.

However, Mike Huckabee is doing his best to become the worst candidate in the GOP field. He invokes Scripture to support the welfare-warfare state. He raised taxes as governor, which earned him an F from the Cato Institute’s ranking of governors in 2006. He wants to abolish the IRS and replace with a “Fair Tax,” a huge sales tax to maintain the failed welfare-warfare state. That’s why the mainstream media are going gaga over Huckabee. He is one of them, an all around interventionist.

What little time Ron Paul had to speak at the CNN YouTube debate he used to tell the truth about the continuing assault on our liberties, our pocketbooks, and the disastrous interventionist foreign policy that has caused the loss of international goodwill we had after 9/11.

The pro-war seven and their supporters in the GOP presidential primary may think they have the high ground. But the reality is that the welfare-warfare state is bleeding the American people dry. And only Ron Paul is telling the truth about taxes, spending, paper money and foreign affairs.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy (www.ramapo.edu/cbpp.) He also writes for www.usadaily.com and www.njvoices.com.

Insuring Mental Health Addiction Services

2007-11-29T10:46:00.000-05:00

By: Senator Joe Vitale

Insurance coverage for alcohol addiction and mental health treatment would be greatly enhanced under a bill I have sponsored in the Senate along with Senator Barbara Buono. Mental health problems, alcohol and drug addictions, anorexia nervosa and other diseases need to be covered in the same manner as those which currently are. This is the right and fair thing to do for those suffering from the burdens of mental health problems and alcohol and drug addictions. We must provide a seamless health care safety net for those in need.

Parity is needed in order to provide services for residents that suffer from certain diseases like post traumatic stress disorder and other emotional disorders. People who can not afford treatment for these types of disorders are left with little, if any, options. Currently, there are a number of “biologically-based mental illnesses” that are covered. We must go further to include a broader range of diseases that greatly affect the population of New Jersey.

The bill would apply to state regulated health insurance contracts including hospital medical and health service corporations, commercial health insurers and the State Health Benefits Plan. The key section of the provision would expand the definition of treatment of alcoholism and substance abuse to include inpatient and outpatient care, detoxification, screening and assessment, and non-hospital residential treatment.

Early diagnosis and treatment of non-biologically based mental illnesses including alcohol and drug addiction will help prevent greater health care costs in the long run. The treatment community has made significant progress in the last decade to break the cycles of addiction with extremely positive, life-saving consequences. I look forward to working with my colleagues in the Legislature to pass this legislation during this session.

Joe Vitale is a State Senator representing New Jersey's 19th Legislative District. The Senator is the Deputy Majority Leader and Chairman of the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee

Why Not Cut Spending?

2007-11-29T00:15:00.000-05:00

Nearly all of the Democratic candidates for President have pledged to roll back the tax cuts enacted under President Bush and some have also said they will raise taxes in addition to the roll back. Although the roll back is a possible solution to our nation’s fiscal woes, before candidates for President rush to increase our taxes, how about cutting spending?

Under President Bush, federal government spending has skyrocketed: “No Child Left Behind”, Medicare prescription “reform,” and the war in Iraq have contributed to an exponential increase in the federal budget. Meanwhile, hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks continue to be provided with no end in sight. These are good places to start cutting costs.

“No Child Left Behind” has met with mixed results, with numerous findings indicating that many teachers simply teach to the required tests rather than having our children learn what they need to know. The costs of the program and its additional mandates to the States have contributed to increased federal and state government spending. Given the program’s mixed reviews and the increased costs attributed to it, the federal government should consider eliminating “No Child Left Behind” or the components that are not working.

Similarly, Medicare’s prescription drug “reform” has sharply increased the costs of the federal government, yet positive results are not readily apparent as many of our nation’s elderly continue to be unable to afford health care and prescription drugs. The “reform” appears to have mainly benefited the health care and pharmaceutical industries. As a result, the federal government should think about curtailing the newly enacted “reforms,” thereby saving our taxpayers billions.

Continue Reading ShapTalk.com: Why Not Cut Spending?

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Hillary Clinton’s downfall?

2007-11-24T12:26:00.000-05:00

By: Murray Sabrin

The Iowa caucuses will be held on January third, and voters in New Hampshire will cast their votes in the nation’s first primary on January eighth. Additional January primaries and caucuses will be held in Michigan, South Carolina, and Florida among other states.

And on February fifth, Super Tuesday, nearly two dozen states from New York, New Jersey and California and in-between the two coasts could determine the presidential nominees of both major political parties.

Senator Hillary Clinton has been leading in the national polls as well as in Iowa and in New Hampshire against her two main rivals, Senator Obama and former senator John Edwards, for the Democrat presidential nomination. However, in the latest ABC/ Washington Post poll Obama leads in Iowa with 30%, Clinton follows with 26% and Edwards comes in at 22%. In other words, Clinton could finish third in Iowa.

And, if an Obama win in Iowa turns into the Big Mo going into the New Hampshire primary a week later, where Clinton now has a huge lead over Obama, 36% to 22%, the “invincibility” of a Clinton presidential nomination, let alone a Clinton nomination, will be in serious jeopardy.

Why would the well oiled, highly disciplined Clinton for President Campaign, crash so quickly, when virtually all of the pundits have crowned her President Hillary Clinton as late as a week ago?

Yesterday's front page Wall Street Journal piece, “Clinton Hits Rough Patch As Iowa Showdown Nears,” explains most of the reasons. Clinton is not only trying to win her party’s presidential nomination, she is also running a parallel general election campaign for the presidency in the fall. So instead of telling her fellow Democrats what she believes, Clinton is trying to run in the “center” now in order to appear “acceptable” to independent voters and disgruntled Republicans.

It will not work. The era of “spinning” may be over. Many voters want straight talk, heartfelt answers, not platitudes, from the candidates.

If Hillary believes in big government, from more government spending and control of healthcare to supporting the military-industrial complex, to preemptive war in Iran, she should stand up and let the world what is her vision for America.

Does Hillary believe in higher tax rates, more spending, more regulation, less or more civil liberties, maintaining U.S. military bases around the world, etc.?

Hillary Clinton’s brain trust is violating Bill Clinton’s first axiom of politics, never look beyond the current campaign. If Hillary does not win the primary, will Bill tell her and the spinmeisters, I told you so?

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy

Let the Sun Shine In and the Chips Fall Where They May

2007-11-23T00:36:00.000-05:00

Recently, the Corzine Administration found itself in court fighting GOP attempts to obtain documents Governor Corzine deems private, including e-mails between the Governor and labor leader Carla Katz as well as a taxpayer-financed study regarding “monetizing” the Turnpike. As someone who holds himself out to be a reformer and a champion of open government, Governor Corzine should end these legal battles and move on to governing the State of New Jersey.

The Administration should release to the public any and all emails with Ms. Katz that deal with the public's business. Mr. Corzine is the Governor of the State; Ms. Katz is a major labor leader in New Jersey who negotiates with his office. Governor Corzine apparently has provided Ms. Katz with millions of dollars during the course of their personal relationship and they both chose to use e-mail to communicate with each other. The public has a right to know whether Mr. Corzine and/or Ms. Katz abused their offices in the process. Any emails pertaining to the purely personal nature of their relationship should be withheld. If the GOP oversteps by attempting to obtain those emails, succeeds and releases them to the public, it is the GOP that will pay the price at the polls.

Continue reading ShapTalk.com: Let the Sun Shine In and the Chips Fall Where They May.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Warren Buffett: big government capitalist

2007-11-17T09:26:00.000-05:00

Murray Sabrin

Last week, Warren Buffett, the second richest American with a net worth of more than $50 billion, came to Washington D.C. and testified in Congress. He told the Senate Finance Committee that the estate tax is needed “to prevent our democracy from becoming a dynastic plutocracy.” Buffett is adamantly opposed to inherited wealth. That’s why his children will receive about one percent of his estate on his passing and the rest will go to charity.

In short, Buffett’s estate could be worth billions more if he lives to a ripe old age and it will pay virtually no estate taxes, yet he wants the estates of small business owners, farmers and successful individuals to pony up billions to Uncle Sam upon their deaths.

Buffett’s personal social views or for that matter anyone else’s should not be the basis for public policy. If the Oracle of Omaha does not want to leave his estate to his children, grandchildren, etc., that is his prerogative.

As for the rest of us, in a free society adults should have the absolute right to give away their property upon their passing to their children, relatives, friends, colleagues, pets, charities, etc., and the federal government should not confiscate any portion of a person’s lifetime accumulation of wealth upon death. Why? Death, as one senator remarked at the Senate Finance Committee hearing, should not be a taxable event.

In a free society, the government is created to protect the people’s rights not confiscate their property. That was the promise of the American Revolution. The colonists seceded from the British Empire to form a nation based on liberty not entitlement, nor was government supposed to redistribute income and wealth. That was the promise of the Founders. Instead, the ideas of big government have taken root in America for the past 100 years and are embraced by capitalists as well as the intelligentsia, journalists and individuals across the political spectrum.

Warren Buffett, the son of the libertarian Republican congressman Howard Buffett, obviously did not learn from his late father that the government should be limited to a few authorized activities enumerated in the Constitution. Instead, Warren Buffett, capitalist par excellence, supports Hillary Clinton for president. If Hillary is elected president, the American people will have been governed by a Bush, a Clinton, a Bush and then a Clinton. What kind of democracy is this? Two families possibly occupying the White House for 28 years if Hillary is elected in 2008 and serves two terms.

If Buffett is so concerned about “dynasties” in America, he should renounce his support of Hillary and embrace the only candidate in the race who is his father’s intellectual heir, Rep. Ron Paul of Texas.

Warren Buffett is a brilliant investor and from all reports a straight shooter. When it comes to public policy, Buffett should reread his father’s views on the welfare-warfare state. He should conclude that government is best that governs least. And that means scrapping the estate tax, the income tax and downsizing the federal government, especially the overseas military bases that have nothing to do with our national security.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy

Let’s End Profiteering From Public Service

2007-11-16T00:28:00.000-05:00

Many of our elected officials on the State, County and local level are using their public office to financially reward themselves at taxpayer expense. One example of this profiteering is elected officials, who are also attorneys, obtaining public business for themselves and their law firms by directly or indirectly using their position to do so. This business is often obtained without competitive bidding. As a result, these elected officials and their firms are getting rich and we taxpayers are paying for it.

The problem is not a Democratic or Republican one; it is a problem that is pervasive in both political parties. For example, Senator Bob Smith (D-Middlesex) is a lawyer who happens to represent towns within his district. Most of his contracts are awarded without competitive bidding. While it is possible that these towns, whose officials are from the same political party as the Senator, are hiring Mr. Smith because he does high-quality legal work, it is just as possible that Senator Smith is getting the business because he is a public official. Similarly, as an attorney, former Senator John Bennett (R) represented numerous towns in his own electoral district during his tenure. This was also done without competitive bidding, the officials in those towns were from the same political party as the Senator, and thus he and/or his firm were able to profit handsomely. Again, by all accounts, Senator Bennett is a skilled municipal law practitioner, but did his law firm receive the municipal work because of his skill or because of his public position?

How do we solve this problem? There are a few possibilities that come to mind: We can have our elected officials serve full-time and thus eliminate the problem. Laws could be passed making it a conflict of interest for currently-serving elected officials to obtain public work. Another suggestion might be that competitive bidding be enacted for all public contracts on every level of government, thereby helping to alleviate the problem.

Whatever the solution, it is time to stop the gravy train on which many of our elected officials are riding. They have been utilizing their public office to obtain public work, thereby financially enriching themselves at great cost to our taxpayers. Given the recent election and the mood of the electorate, which is becoming less and less enamored with politicians profiting at the public’s expense, perhaps the time is ripe for reform.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

On My Retirement from Partisan Politics

2007-11-09T01:06:00.000-05:00

As many of you know, four years ago I decided to see how local politics really operates and became Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party in New Jersey. New Providence had not elected a Democrat in nearly fifty years. I promised to serve a maximum of four years as Chairman and, keeping to my promise, I retired on November 7, 2007. I now no longer serve in any political capacity and am thus able to devote my full energies to my family, work and this column.

We have made significant progress for the residents of New Providence during the past four years. When I first became Chairman, we announced a platform of openness, accountability and transparency and, during the past four years, have seen our issues take center stage and many of our proposals later adopted by the Council. We proposed ethics reform, including "Pay to Play," which limited the influence of campaign contributions on governmental decision-making. This was later adopted by the Council. We championed competitive bidding for contracts, which is in the process of being adopted by the Council this year. We proposed televised Council meetings, which are slated to occur in 2008. One of many lessons I learned through this experience is that on the local level, a nonpartisan agenda that is focused on creating a more responsive and responsible government can both advance positive change as well as develop a base of support for any political party. Given the nonpartisan agenda we developed in New Providence and our success in such a short period of time, local political parties of all partisan affiliations should consider such an agenda in their towns.

We have also made significant strides in creating a viable alternative for voters in New Providence, where Republicans outnumber Democrats by more than a 3-to-1 margin. During the past four years, our average meeting attendance has more than quadrupled and our active membership that could be counted on one hand when I started as Chair, today is over a hundred. We have proven that the Democratic Party can be viable in New Providence and we have fielded solid slates of local candidates each year. Through this experience, I also learned that with hard work, patience, and grassroots activity, a minority party in any town in New Jersey can have a voice and eventually be in a position to elect representatives to the local governing body.

While we have accomplished a great deal, there is more work yet to be done. This has been left in the capable hands of our next Chairperson. It has been an honor and a privilege to serve the residents of New Providence and I thank them for the opportunity to do so.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Why Has the Media Been Nominating Hillary? And What About Rudy?

2007-11-02T01:03:00.000-04:00

What is Joe Biden’s position on the budget deficit? What is Chris Dodd’s platform? Why is there virtually no coverage of Bill Richardson? Why have there been so media stories laced with connotations that John Edwards has already lost? Why are there so many headlines regarding Barack Obama as a fading star? Why are there so few stories about recent polls showing Hillary with unfavorable ratings topping 50% and so little ink being spilled regarding Mrs. Clinton’s “baggage”? In short, why, up until this past week’s debate in Iowa, did the media crown Hillary Clinton the Democratic nominee? There are several possibilities:

First, the profit-driven media is interested in ratings and ad revenue and nothing says “ratings and ad revenue” like the sordid scandals, real and imaginary, that will focus on Hillary Clinton should she secure the nomination. Furthermore, the story of a former First Lady and a woman running for President will also command an audience. Lastly, the dynamic of a restoration of the Clinton years versus the Republican alternative is a story that makes the media drool.

Second, both the moderates/liberals and conservative members of the media would like to see Mrs. Clinton become the Democratic nominee. For the moderates/liberals, despite her vote for the Iraq War, she represents a pendulum shift back to Clinton-era domestic policies that favored a more supportive federal government and a more diplomatic foreign policy. For conservatives, Hillary is the one Democratic candidate that can reunite the fractured Republican Party, resurrecting its chances for electoral success.

Third, the media is actually thirsting for a general election fight between two larger-than-life personalities who will engage in partisan warfare on a level not before seen in our country: Hillary versus Rudy. If that were not the case, all of the sordid dealings of the former Mayor, from Bernard Kerik to divorcing his wife on television, would have already been front page fodder for months. A Hillary/Rudy battle would lead to daily front-page barbs that will both resurrect a faltering newspaper industry and reinvigorate the audience for television news. It will also lead to record-breaking fundraising that will help financially support the various media outlets that will air and print campaign ads.

While Hilary may be the most qualified Democratic candidate in the field and could very well turn out to be the best general election candidate as well, shouldn’t Democratic voters decide the Primary election and not the Fourth Estate? Likewise, shouldn’t Republican voters decide their nominee, not the media?

This past week, the media began to focus negative light on Mrs. Clinton after a less-than stellar performance at a debate in Iowa demonstrated that she may not be a lock for the nomination. Also this past week, after a dismal showing by Mr. Giuliani at a gathering of conservatives, he received several days of critical press coverage while several Republican contenders including John McCain, Fred Thompson, and Mike Huckabee received substantial and positive press coverage, possibly signaling the beginning of the end of the press’s facilitation of the Giuliani candidacy. Perhaps the media is ready to finally start doing its job. Thankfully, with the primaries still months away, it’s not too late.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press. Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

More government “oversight”?

2007-10-27T07:55:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

The State Commission of Investigation issued a long awaited report on New Jersey’s public colleges and universities. And guess what the report uncovered? There could be better management and tighter financial controls at some institutions. What a news flash! Is there any institution or organization in America or in the world that does not need better financial controls? Of course not. So why all the angst?

Simply, Trenton lawmakers want more “oversight” (make that control) over the state’s colleges and universities after revelations that a lot of monkey business was taking place at UMDNJ. And by looking bad especially when one of their own is accused of having a no-show job at UMDNJ and steering more tax dollars to the university, we are witnessing another example of CYA.

The egregious management of UMDNJ should have taught both lawmakers and the public an important lesson, mixing government and education is a toxic combination. We must remember the old adage, “Those who control the purse strings, make the rules.” Both the governor and legislators believe they must extend great oversight of taxpayer assisted institutions because there have been insufficient financial controls in place. However, the remedy is as easy as ABC, require more documentation and accountability of expenditures. End of story. Public colleges and universities do not need more state government “oversight.”

In the meantime, there will be legislative hearings about some of the investigation’s findings, where some members of the Statehouse will grandstand before the cameras and express their outrage. However, where was the outrage when the Schools Construction Corporation blew $8.6 billion in no time?

What we are witnessing is nothing less than a setup for another power grab by the Trenton establishment to extend their paws in one of the bright spots in New Jersey, public higher education.

What the legislators should be doing is thanking the higher education community for training young men and women to be productive and responsible citizens in the Garden State, while state aid has been cut substantially in real terms during the past two decades. After all, the political establishment needs more workers in New Jersey to tax so they can continue their overspending.

For the long term, New Jersey’s state colleges and universities should become financially independent. That will take politics out of higher education once-and-for-all and preserve the mission of these institutions--to make higher education affordable for middle and lower income families.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He is the author of Tax Free 2000: The Rebirth of American Liberty. Sabrin writes a weekly column for www.usadaily.com and blogs for the Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, www.njvoices.com.

Genuine Leadership—A Pipe Dream?

2007-10-25T00:11:00.000-04:00

As Governor Corzine’s tenure continues, it is becoming more and more apparent that he is realizing his vision of a fiscally responsible and ethical government will not come to fruition during either his current term or a second term, should he seek one. He took office thinking that his vast bank account would enable him to be independent and allow him to lead without owing anyone anything. It appears that he has come to realize that despite his bank account, the recalcitrant politicians in Trenton are reluctant to advance any reform that will cut them off from the public trough. Therefore, Governor Corzine’s reform agenda depends on Assemblymen and State Senators. As a result, his thoughtful ideas stand little chance of passage. For the greater good, Governor Corzine could bring about the kind of change he alleges he would like to see happen. However, he would have to forgo a second term, be willing to make lifelong enemies, and conceivably use some of his own assets. In short, the Governor would have to exhibit what many consider to be selfless genuine leadership. To that end, the following are some suggestions:

After the November election, Governor Corzine should first announce that he will not seek another term. Then he should declare war against all politicians living off the taxpayers, including double-dipping pension padders, those who use their office to benefit their outside business, and foes of meaningful reform. He should, instead, support a slate of reform candidates in both the 2009 Democratic and Republican Primaries. Using his vast resources, he could utilize every law on the books to infiltrate selectively chosen heavily-Democratic and Republican districts where a well-funded challenger could defeat the incumbent. He could then raise funds to recruit a full slate of Democratic or Republican committeepeople in every municipality in each such district. He should publicly endorse the slate of reform candidates and campaign with them and develop a team of genuine leaders from across the political spectrum which would stump throughout the state where they could most make an electoral difference. Likewise, in those same districts, he should actively attempt to oust all foes of reform in the County Party that is home to the district and fund credible challengers.

A well-thought out campaign with a blank check could result in the ouster of ten to twenty-five percent of the Legislature, creating enough votes within that body (when uniting with other reform-minded Democrats and Republicans) to enact the reforms the Governor would like to see implemented. At that point, with a year left in his tenure, Governor Corzine could truly reform New Jersey politics and leave behind a lasting positive legacy.

A pipe dream? Probably. But what an inspiring and exciting campaign it would be!

Is Murtha Running A Corporation?

2007-10-22T14:11:00.000-04:00

By: Representative Scott Garrett

Each time my conservative colleagues and I draw attention to the growing problem of earmarks we hear the retort that they represent only a very small portion of the total federal budget. That can’t be denied, but what is undoubtedly true is that Members and lobbyists also spend a disproportionate amount of energy and time attaining these earmarks.

This energy is misplaced as we face a growing storm of entitlement disaster. Imagine fitting out your house with the finest plumbing system, electronically controlled showers, gold-plated faucets, and a $10,000 dollar toilet with heated seats. You sit back to admire all your investments and then find out that none of it is going to work because you have nothing left to pay the water bill.

We are rushing around gathering up earmarks—a $2 million dollar library named after a sitting Member of Congress, a $39 million dollar intelligence center, a $1 million infrastructure center that may or may not exist—while our increasing entitlement burden will wipe out our ability to fund any discretionary accounts in just a few short years.

And, make no mistake about it – those earmarks add up. While the average House Republican received $8.7 million and the average Democrat received $10.3 million in earmarked funds, the Speaker received some $67 million and Appropriations Cardinal Murtha topped the list at over $179 million in earmarks.

And these two numbers don’t include the earmarks that the Speaker and Chairman Murtha signed on with other members. No doubt, if those numbers were included there would be millions more added to each of their totals.

Congressional districts may be allocated by population, but earmarks are allocated by raw political power. The taxpayers of the fifth district of New Jersey and the twelfth district of Pennsylvania are equal in the eyes of the IRS, but when it comes to the way we spend those taxes there is gross disparity.

With the $166 million in defense earmarks that Rep. Murtha controls, he is no longer a Congressman; he is also the CEO of a mid-sized corporation.

Of course, these numbers don’t account for everything because we have no assurance that earmarks are properly recorded across all of the bills that come to the House floor. The SCHIP conference report was stacked with giveaways and yet the Democrat leadership certified that the bill contained no earmarks.

Speaker Pelosi promised real earmark reform and now we see just how hollow these promises were. Until we have real reform, it will be impossible to control our growing federal budget and ensure that the people’s money is responsibly spent.

U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett is a three- term Republican from the fifth district of New Jersey.

Consumer-driven Healthcare

2007-10-20T07:14:00.000-04:00

By: Murray Sabrin

The fourth annual Sebastian J. Raciti Memorial Lecture was held last Wednesday on the campus of Ramapo College. The event is sponsored by the Center for Business and Public Policy and the Ramapo Business Network.

This year’s guest lecturer was Regina Herzlinger who holds the Nancy R. McPherson Professor of Business Administration Chair at the Harvard Business School. She is the author Who Killed Health Care: America's $2 Trillion Problem - and the Consumer-Driven Cure (McGraw-Hill, June 2007) and Consumer-Driven Health Care (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004), the best-selling Market-Driven Health Care (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Paperback, 1999).

In her 70 minute presentation Professor Herzlinger explained how employers have become responsible for the health insurance of their employees. She also explained that our healthcare costs have skyrocketed because of the “iron triangle” of our medical system. According to Herzlinger, insurers, hospitals and Congress have no incentive to keep costs down. Hence, health costs continue to rise despite the promises made by the federal government that costs would be contained by more mandates, controls, regulations, and intervention in medicine.

The bottom line, according to Professor Herzlinger, is that no matter who wins the presidency next year, a consumer driven healthcare model will replace the current system over the next several years. That means employers will no longer be purchasing medical insurance for their employees. It means that individuals will have to educate themselves about medical insurance and health issues so they can determine the best insurance policy for their households. It means that we can achieve universal coverage without a single payer like Canada or England.

In short, Professor Herzlinger’s vision for healthcare will be an entrepreneurial model that has worked so well in other sectors of the economy where innovation, competition, low prices, and high quality serve consumers. Instead of relying on employers to provide us with insurance, we the people will have to become real healthcare shoppers in a more transparent medical sector that for too long has kept consumers in the dark.

Professor Herlzlinger’s new book is must reading for anyone who wants to understand how consumers will finally take charge of their healthcare needs, and how we can have universal coverage without a government takeover of the $2.2 trillion healthcare sector.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He is the author of Tax Free 2000: The Rebirth of American Liberty. Sabrin writes a weekly column for www.usadaily.com and blogs for the Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, www.njvoices.com.

An Exodus from New Jersey: Why?

2007-10-18T00:06:00.000-04:00

A recent study by Rutgers University shows residents of the Garden State are leaving in large numbers. More than 72,000 residents left New Jersey than arrived here just last year alone. As a result, tax revenue was reduced by nearly $700 million while New Jersey’s economy lost approximately $10 billion in personal income because of the exodus. The emigration is likely to continue and will only swell budget deficits in the years ahead. While Governor Corzine has stated that the exodus is the result of retirements and that is true to at least some extent, there is much more at play:

First, property taxes continue to skyrocket and are now the highest in the nation, pricing the elderly out of their homes and preventing young people from moving into the State. Second, housing prices in New Jersey are some of the nation's highest, discouraging people from moving into the State. Third, while New Jersey's social service system is still in the forefront of most, other states are beginning to make strides, reducing the gap in services between them and the Garden State. Fourth, traffic and congestion in New Jersey are only getting worse, causing air and water pollution and continual frustration to its commuters. Fifth, because of a rush for ratables, open space has dwindled as both residential and business developments have transformed this State’s once pristine landscape. Finally, residents have lost faith in the honesty and trustworthiness of the government running the State and are tired of seeing their hard-earned taxpayer dollars used to fund political corruption.

Each of these problems can be reduced, perhaps greatly, if our elected officials recognize that they exist and take the lead in helping to solve them. Such leadership must come from the top. Rather than simply dismiss the mass exodus of our residents as purely a result of retirements, Governor Corzine should urge that these other issues, which are impacting the number of people who are leaving New Jersey and the millions of residents still living in the State, be dealt with in an open, transparent, thoughtful and communicative process.

“Legalized Bribery” Continues Unabated

2007-10-10T20:05:00.000-04:00

Despite the enactment of “Pay to Play” legislative initiatives throughout the State, legalized bribery continues unabated in New Jersey. Loopholes are continually being exploited to raise money for candidates and political causes on the backs of those with business before the government or those seeking to receive such business. As a result, the same breed of politician remains in power and those who contribute get a leg up on the competition when it comes to the awarding of government business.

Those who argue that the system is a necessary evil, because without it campaign cash would be hard to come by, are missing the boat. If people believe enough in a candidate or a cause or a political party’s platform, they will willingly open their wallets. That’s the whole point of political contributions: to show your support for a candidate or political party or cause. The truth is that the only reason those who justify the system may be right is because of the current state of politics in our State.

First, many candidates being offered up by both political parties are by-and-large the same type of uninspiring selfish politicians that have dominated the political landscape in our State for the past 50 years. These same candidates run endlessly negative campaigns filled with personal attacks and innuendo and little substance. They do not inform, motivate or inspire our residents, providing little reason for our citizens to dig into their own pockets to fund their campaigns.

Second, the political parties in New Jersey all too often offer little for our residents and thus receive a minimum in the way of financial support from them. The State Republican Party is on life-support, is relentlessly negative, and offers no meaningful solution to most of our State’s most pressing problems. The State Democratic Party, ensconced because of both the blue trend New Jersey has undergone in the last decade as well as the incompetence of the Republican Party, is sitting pretty with little fear of electoral retribution and thus has no reason to go out of its way to provide thoughtful and positive change for our residents. If the State Republican Party developed a meaningful and thoughtful platform that would provide real solutions to New Jersey’s vexing issues, residents of New Jersey would willingly fill their coffers. Similarly, if the State Democratic Party took a more vocal stand on issues of importance to New Jerseyans and showed it was truly working in our best interest, its bank account would similarly be enriched.

Third, most PACs and similar groups are nothing more than lobbying arms or masked campaign engines of the politicians and their supporters and a way to circumvent laws meant to reform politics and political fundraising. If PACs and similar organizations actually began to stand for something and that concept resonated with our residents, contributions would flow in.

It is undoubtedly true that eliminating legalized bribery in New Jersey will have consequences for our political system. More honest, better informed candidates with thoughtful ideas will have to be found and encouraged to run. The State Parties will have to offer a meaningful agenda for our State’s residents with real solutions to New Jersey’s problems, such as skyrocketing State debt and property taxes, not clever sound bytes and negative attacks. And PACs will have to find real causes to support and motivate residents to contribute to them. These consequences can only improve politics in New Jersey.

More SCHIPs to ponder

2007-10-06T08:29:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

For several weeks, leftists of all stripes have been criticizing President Bush for threatening to veto an expansion of the SCHIP program. The other day President Bush did veto the bill, and the Democrat controlled Congress will try to muster two thirds majorities in each chamber to override his veto.

Both the president and the Congress agree on the premise: the federal government and state governments are responsible for the healthcare of children. All they disagree on is how fast SCHIP should expand. Democrats want to put the “pedal to the metal,” while the president wants to increase the program incrementally.

Supporters of the SCHIP have asserted that the federal-state funded program that subsidizes health insurance for youngsters who do not qualify for Medicaid is not socialism. They are right. The SCHIP program is not a takeover of the medical profession. The federal government will not takeover or “run” the medical sector of the economy.

SCHIP is an example of welfare statism, a redistribution of income form taxpayers to beneficiaries of a heavily government subsidized. In short, SCHIP is a logical outgrowth of the New Deal/Great Society paradigm, “helping” people by making them even more dependent on government, i.e. taxpayers.

To assert that SCHIP is an unqualified success is to take a very, very moral relavist position. For example, what if an individual with a “heart of gold” successfully robbed banks and redistributed the loot to families with no health insurance. The robber, in this case, a compassionate soul who sees youngster having no health insurance, decides to do something about it. Taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots is outright theft. Can this act ever be justified in our society? Do the ends ever justify immoral means?

Yet, this is the essence of the SCHIP program. The government taxes (takes) the people in order to give their money to other people. Or, the government sometimes returns the taxpayers’ money to them in the form of “rebates,” or provides them for services they may not want or need.

As my late father used to say all the time, “Remember, there is a right way and a wrong way.” SCHIP has outstanding intentions. However, it is the wrong way to address the healthcare needs of low and middle-income families. Healthcare can once again become very affordable without subsidies if we eliminate all the barriers that prevent patients and doctors from making arrangements that are in their best interests. It is called healthcare freedom.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also writes for www.usadaily.com and www.njvoices.com.

Corruption and the November Election

2007-10-03T22:38:00.000-04:00

A recent Quinnipiac poll revealed that nine out of ten New Jersey voters believe that corruption is a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem. However, a sizeable majority of voters polled said that the issue would not sway their vote to the Republican column despite the announcement of several recent high profile corruption cases against prominent Democrats. What does this mean for New Jersey residents?

First, we can expect that there will be no Republican landslide in November’s legislative elections. Rather, it would not be surprising if the Democrats pick up a few seats in districts that have been trending blue yet are currently held by Republican incumbents.

Second, there will be a good deal of posturing by candidates from both parties attempting to claim the mantle for being a reformer or for being more ethical or honest than their opponent. This posturing is unlikely to lead to positive legislative changes after the election.

Third, don’t be surprised to see the Democrats unveil a reform plan in the next few weeks that will severely undermine the Republican Party’s ability to use the issue of corruption as a sledgehammer against the Democrats.

Lastly, we can expect an endless barrage of negative print, radio, and television ads with candidates attacking their adversaries for every real or exaggerated transgression and attempting to make their opponents out to be the poster child for corruption in New Jersey.

Despite the findings of the poll that corruption will not sway voters from one party to the other, both political parties would make a catastrophic mistake by ignoring the fact that so many New Jersey voters believe corruption is a problem. While New Jersey voters may not yet be ready to exact vengeance on politicians for corruption in our State, the number of citizens upset about this issue continues to climb. It is only a matter of time before New Jersey voters decide that enough is enough.

Another $30M?

2007-09-27T02:19:00.000-04:00

When the building of the new Jets/Giants stadium was being debated, taxpayers were repeatedly assured that it would not cost them a dime. Soon they were saddled with costs for improved roadways leading to the stadium and other similar services. Now, the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority (NJSEA) has unanimously voted to have the taxpayers pay tens of millions of dollars to refinance the stadium debt. It turns out that tax-free bonds were initially used to finance the debt; however, now that the land upon which the stadium is being built is privately owned, the Internal Revenue Service requires that taxable bonds finance it. The NJSEA therefore voted to refinance the project using taxable bonds, which will add $20M-$30M to New Jersey’s state debt. This amount will eventually need to be paid by New Jersey taxpayers. The situation raises numerous questions that demand answers:

First, did the NJSEA vote to refinance the stadium before seeking other options? While NJSEA Board members reportedly stated they had no choice, did the NJSEA approach the Jets and Giants to request that they pick up the tab? If not, why not?

Second, why will New Jersey have to pay the bill instead of the Jets and Giants? Furthermore, since the teams demand to keep the moniker, “New York”, why should New Jersey and her taxpayers pick up the tab?

Third, which elected officials are responsible for this fiasco? When did they know of this situation and what did they do to prevent it?

Finally, why oh why are New Jersey taxpayers continuing to fund professional sports teams? These sports teams are raking in hundreds of millions of dollars while our State and her citizens are drowning in debt. If the Jets and Giants can afford tens of millions of dollars for less than successful players, surely they can cover a $30M tab to finance their elaborate new stadium, which will earn them millions more in the long-term.

It is time to end government sponsorship of professional sports in New Jersey and to recognize that such sponsorship is an abuse of the taxpayer that must not be tolerated. It is also time to hold accountable the elected and appointed officials who engineered yet another taxpayer-funded debacle.

A Roadmap for Reform

2007-09-20T00:25:00.000-04:00

In the wake of several high-profile corruption stings in the State of New Jersey, it is an opportune time to seriously improve the condition of Garden State politics. The following roadmap for reform is meant to provide some thoughtful ideas to help generate a public and constructive dialogue about these important issues in order to enable both our elected leaders and our citizens to begin to develop a consensus for reforming New Jersey politics.

First, it is time for a full time legislature in New Jersey with commensurate pay. Double-dipping would be eliminated as would conflicts of interest and other ethical problems, including pension padding. Meanwhile, our elected officials would have the time to actually read the legislation they are voting upon and hold meaningful hearings and discussions about proposals and legislation before they are considered for a vote, thereby leading to improved public policy and increased fiscal responsibility.

Second, to lessen the pernicious influence of campaign cash and to enable citizens of ordinary means to have the ability to run for office and win, a fiscally responsible public financing system should be established. For example, candidates who personally obtain a certain number of signatures of registered voters (a number that would demonstrate that the candidate spent a good deal of time and energy and has popular support) could receive 50% of the average amount of money spent in that particular legislative district over the past five elections and could be designated as a “Clean Election Candidate” on the ballot and in any campaign literature or advertisements. As a consequence, they would be prohibited from raising any outside money but perhaps could contribute their own money to their campaign and would have to donate any left over funds to the public financing system. Candidates who elect to bypass public financing could raise unlimited amounts of money but would have to disclose the source and amount of each contribution on a State-operated website. The public financing system could be paid for through a volunteer check-off on our State income tax statement and voluntary contributions by individuals and businesses, who could be listed in television, radio, and newspaper advertising thanking them for financing clean campaigns in New Jersey.

Third, to limit the influence peddling in New Jersey politics, businesses that contribute to candidates would have to fill out mandatory disclosure forms available on the internet that list all principals and all lobbyists. Under criminal penalty, the officers of the business would have to state that they have no commercial interests currently before the official to whom the business is contributing campaign funds.

Finally, all legislative districts in New Jersey should be redrawn by an independent panel using a computer program that divides districts by taking the current Statewide percentage of registered Democrats, registered Republicans and registered but unaffiliated voters every ten years, and then carving 40 districts throughout the State that are each composed of that percentage of each category. This would enable every district in New Jersey to be competitive, helping to resurrect vibrant political discourse and diminishing apathy amongst New Jersey voters who no longer feel they have a real choice when they enter the voting booth since either one party or the other is a foregone winner.

Of course, there are pros and cons to all of these ideas. However, they are typical of those that may be proposed by our elected officials and publicly debated and discussed in the halls of Trenton down to the local coffee shop. The recent high-profile corruption busts in New Jersey provide a golden opportunity to finally reform New Jersey politics. Why wait?

Democrat bosses “whack” Coniglio

2007-09-15T09:16:00.000-04:00

By: Murray Sabrin

Senator Coniglio of Paramus announced Wednesday he would not seek reelection this fall after denying for weeks he would drop out of the race. Apparently, Coniglio’s fate was sealed after he met with Senate President Dick Codey and Bergen County Democratic Chairman Joe Ferriero hours earlier.

Despite being the target of a federal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office for allegedly using his influence as a state senator to steer $1.6 million in state funds to Hackensack University Medical Center after he was hired as a $5,000 month plumbing consultant by the hospital, Senator Coniglio has been professing he did not do anything wrong.

Let’s look at what has transpired. A state senator like his counterparts in the legislature routinely funnels funds for local pet projects. That is the nature of the beast known as state government grants and appropriations. But in this case, Senator Coniglio was being paid for what may have been a dubious job by HUMC to get a steady stream of grants to his “client.”

Only time will tell if Senator Coniglio broke the law.

Senator Coniglio was dropped—or was pushed aside—by the party bosses because they presumably did not want to have spend a ton of campaign funds defending a “safe” senate seat where the incumbent is under federal investigation.

In America, everyone is innocent until proven guilty. The senator should have remained in the race and let the voters decide his fate. After all, in a democracy the people should decide who is supposed to represent them, not party bosses.

But this is New Jersey. And in the Garden State, the bosses rule. Haven’t you been watching The Sopranos? When you get “whacked” by Tony S. you are dead. Kaput. When you get “whacked” by Codey and boss Joe, your political career is kaput.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also writes for www.usadaily.com and www.njvoices.com.

Just Shy of a Dozen: How Many More Pols are in Christie’s Crosshairs?

2007-09-12T22:45:00.000-04:00

This past week, eleven elected officials were arrested by the FBI and charged by United States Attorney for the State of New Jersey Chris Christie with accepting bribes in exchange for steering public contracts to private companies. The eleven range from former members of the Pleasantville Board of Education to Assemblyman Rev. Alfred E. Steele who is also undersheriff for Passaic County. While the alleged individual payments are small, ranging from $1,500 to $17,500, the amount of money in question is immaterial: any amount of money accepted by an elected official in exchange for certain action is illegal and an affront to all New Jersey taxpayers. Given the large number of officials arrested, is this the end of Chris Christie’s corruption busting? Likely, it is only the beginning.

Since New Jersey has 566 municipalities and over 600 school boards and thousands of local, county and state elected and appointed officials, even if a small percentage of them are corrupt, the number of politicians in Chris Christie’s crosshairs would be enormous. Add to this the likelihood that there are more than just a small percentage of elected officials who are legally or ethically compromised and the number expands exponentially.

What is it that causes New Jersey’s elected officials to engage in illegal conduct on a level not seen in most other states? First, years of indifference by federal law enforcement in New Jersey permitted politicians to think that they could do whatever they pleased and not get caught. Second, weak attorneys general in the State of New Jersey in recent history enabled politicians to become reckless. Third, politicians themselves are brought up in a political environment in New Jersey that survives on massive campaign contributions, spending, and influence peddling to a degree not seen in most other states. Fourth, many politicians hold more than one job, creating serious conflicts of interest that have gone unchecked for years. Fifth, there is often a symbiotic relationship between politicians and the press, which undermines the “watchdog role” of the media and has caused the media to follow, rather than lead, when it comes to corruption in New Jersey politics. Sixth, the politicians themselves who make it to elected office have frequently succumbed to the ethical pressures surrounding them during their campaigns and afterwards, leading them to be more willing to cross the legal line. Finally, because of human nature, which typically can involve greed and ulterior motives, many politicians are not in politics for altruistic reasons but rather to advance themselves, their friends, and their relatives, whether it be through political connections or jobs or money.

For all of these reasons, New Jersey politicians are ripe targets for corruption investigations. Given Chris Christie’s focus on rooting out corruption in New Jersey politics, he is likely to snare many more pols before he leaves office. The only question is just how many can he bust in the time he has remaining.

GOP (except one) and Fox News Warmongers

2007-09-07T22:21:00.000-04:00

By: Murray Sabrin

Last Wednesday in New Hampshire Fox News hosted another GOP presidential debate. Instead of a “fair and balanced” debate, the Fox trio of Hume, Wallace and Goler revealed once again why Fox News has become the cheerleader for death and destruction in Iraq.

This time, Chris Wallace played the role of hatchet man when he asked Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, the only anti-war GOP candidate in the race, if America’s foreign policy should take its marching orders from al Qaeda. Paul had just explained why al Qaeda attacked the Untied States on 9/11. One of the reasons for the attacks on 9/11, according to Bin Laden and other Muslim fundamentalists, is the stationing of American troops on the Arabian Peninsula after the first Gulf War.

The smirky Wallace thought he had a gotcha moment that would sink Ron Paul’s candidacy. It didn’t work. In fact, after the debate Fox’s text message poll gave Ron Paul an overwhelming victory with 33% of the vote, to the consternation of the totally clueless Sean Hannity.

In addition, with the sole exception of Rep. Ron Paul, the other GOP presiedntial candidates justified the (illegal) invasion of Iraq by parroting the Bush line that the “war on terror” had to be brought to the “enemy,” and therefore the overthrow of Saddam Hussein was not only justified but also in the great tradition of America defending liberty and democracy around the world.

Rep. Ron Paul, a ten term congressman, voted against the war’s authorization and the Patriot Act. His candidacy is being virtually ignored by the mainstream media as quirky and irrelevant. Yet, the crowds are building, the funds are pouring in, and he’s winning straw polls or coming in a close second.

The American people got to see the GOP candidates last week, except for Fred Thompson, who announced his candidacy on the Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

If you missed the fireworks between Ron Paul and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, you missed a classic confrontation between the anti-war Paul and the blood thirsty minister/politician. You also missed the remarks and smirks of the most thuggish politician in America, Rudy Giuliani. You also missed the canned remarks of America’s most plastic politician, Mitt Romney. And finally, you missed the attempt by Fox News to resurrect the sinking candidacy of John McCann, who after seeing the horrors of war four decades ago, still loves war as a tool of American foreign policy.

There is only one GOP presidential candidate who can save the party from itself and the country from a continuation of the welfare/warfare state, and that is Ron Paul.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey. He writes for www.njvoices.com and www.usadaily.com

Return the Cash, Senator Kean

2007-09-06T22:53:00.000-04:00

Just last year, Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr. (R-Union) was running as an “ethical reformer” against Bob Menendez (D-Hudson) for the United States Senate. Kean ran a negative campaign, hammering Menendez with allegations of unethical conduct, including accusations about campaign fundraising and donations. Fast-forward less than a year and it is State Senator Kean on the receiving end of tainted campaign contributions.

Earlier this month, Senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) resigned from the United States Senate after pleading guilty to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge when he was arrested for lewd conduct in a public restroom. Craig, an arch-conservative, who has been an outspoken critic of homosexuality, was accused of soliciting gay sex in a public bathroom from an undercover police officer. Craig pleaded guilty but failed to disclose the arrest or his guilty plea to the public. After pressure from prominent Republicans, Senator Craig resigned his seat.

State Senator Thomas H. Kean Jr. collected approximately $10,000 from Senator Craig in December 2005 and September 2006 and has refused to return those donations. Justin Richards, a spokesman for Kean, recently told the media, “The donations we received in December 2005 and September 2006 have been used for expenses during last year's campaign.”

While Mr. Kean can attempt to justify his refusal to return the contributions on the theory that they have already been used for expenses, the argument is a tough sell. Contributions from one or two years ago are usually spent but that has not kept other politicians from returning such contributions. For example, both Senator Lautenberg and Governor Corzine recently agreed to donate hefty contributions from a Democratic fundraiser who pleaded guilty to a felony charge in 1991, which was recently revealed in an article in the Wall Street Journal.

Kean may also argue that his campaign fund is in debt and, therefore, he does not have the money available to return the contributions. While federal records reveal that Kean is owed $130,000 by his campaign, those records also show Kean’s campaign has $47,000 in cash on hand, $37,000 more than the Kean campaign needs to return the contributions. As an heir to the Kean fortune, any cry of poverty by Kean Jr. would not pass the “smell test.”

Tom Kean Jr. should return the $10,000 to Senator Craig or donate the money to charity. To keep the tainted money sends a powerful message that Senator Kean is no “ethical reformer” but rather, an opportunist. Do the right thing and return the cash, Senator Kean.

Political Contributions Take On Yet Another Murky Role

2007-08-31T01:33:00.000-04:00

Federal election law allows retired elected officials to donate campaign funds that remain in their election accounts to charities, political parties, and candidates. The law prohibits such officials from using the funds for personal expenses. Despite this prohibition, the use of campaign funds by retired elected officials is a cause for concern. Former United States Senator Bob Torricelli (D-NJ) is a case in point.

After retiring from the Senate under an ethical cloud in 2002, Senator Torricelli had accumulated $2.9 million of unused campaign funds. Since 2002, he has spent approximately $900,000 of that sum and retains about $2,000,000. While a good chunk of the $900,000 has been donated to charities, Mr. Torricelli spent at least $65,000 in donations to politicians and affiliated organizations that directly or indirectly had business dealings with the former Senator or his clients. His donations range from contributions to Harry Reid, United States Senator from Nevada, to local politicians in Trenton. The common thread is that each of the recipients had a direct or indirect link to a business interest of Mr. Torricelli from which the Senator profited shortly before or after the donation.

When someone donates to a candidate, he expects that candidate to spend the money on his own campaign and to promote his candidacy. When candidates retire with large sums in their campaign accounts, why should those donations be able to be used by the candidate to fuel his business interests or reward his political allies? If a donor wanted to aid the former official’s business interests or political allies, he could easily do so by writing a check directly to those business interests or political allies. It is clear that the intent of a political donor is not to fund such interests but rather to assist the candidate in his campaign.

A retired elected official should have only two choices regarding unused campaign funds: return them to the donor or contribute them to the federal or state programs that currently provide matching funds through income tax check-offs to candidates who accept certain campaign fundraising restrictions. In this way, either the donor receives his money back or his money is donated to benefit the political system as a whole. These are avenues that are closest to the original intent of the donor and would best abide by the wishes of most donors. Although it is difficult to locate donors to return their contributions and the matching funds programs have weaknesses, the current system of allowing retired officials to donate funds to advance their personal and business interests is ripe for abuse and flies in the face of the intent of the donor. It is time to reform the system.

Transportation Spending

2007-08-24T12:40:00.000-04:00

By: Representative Scott Garrett

For the survivors of the tragic bridge collapse in Minnesota and for the families and friends of those who perished when that bridge plunged 60 feet down into the Mississippi River, that day will not soon be forgotten. But, there are lessons to be learned and remembered for us all, particularly for Congress, if we are to avoid future tragedies like this one.

For one, we must ask to what extent did the epidemic spread of pork barrel spending over the years squeeze out the federal funding that has been needed for truly necessary national infrastructure projects.

Not only are we not addressing this question, learning from past mistakes, but the emerging trend appears to be to piggyback on this tragedy as justification for increasing federal spending and even increasing federal gas taxes. Far too many Members of Congress have seized on this human tragedy to call for more money out of taxpayer pockets instead of exercising their own restraint in packing federal funding bills with personal pork barrel.

In the wake of the bridge collapse, the U.S. Department of Transportation made $5 million in federal funding immediately available to the State of Minnesota. The State has as much as $2 million available in its reserve highway fund, as well. In addition, Congress passed legislation to waive caps on emergency relief funds that could be appropriated to rebuild the bridge, allowing for as much as $5 million in federal funds to be spent on this bridge alone.

I supported that bill. Had I been given the opportunity by the Democrat leadership that pushed it through without opportunity for amendment or much debate, I would have preferred changes to that bill. For instance, I would have preferred that Congress not waive the state and local funding share. But prompt action to at least provide flexibility in meeting this tragedy was the responsible response from Congress.

That said, on the very day that Congress passed this emergency measure to rebuild the Minneapolis bridge, it also passed a bill making “technical corrections” to the massive $287 billion transportation authorization bill passed in 2005. The Chairman of the Transportation Committee, who also authored the emergency bridge legislation, announced in a press release that this “technical corrections” bill made more than $11 million in funding available for projects in his Minnesota district. This included nearly $2.3 million for upgrades to Elizabeth Avenue in Coleraine, Minnesota, a town of about 1,100 people between Duluth and Fargo.

Responsible governance would dictate that Congress give the State of Minnesota the ability to shift funds out of Congressional pet projects of lower priority and into those projects of extraordinary need and great consequence to hundreds of thousands of people. Responsible governance would dictate that we prioritize our use of taxpayer dollars rather than treat your bank accounts as one big, limitless Congressional ATM.

Millions upon millions of dollars are authorized and appropriated each year that catapult photo opportunities for Congressmen and Senators ahead of the priority lists that states set each year based on the needs of their state residents. We hear now that more than 73,000 bridges in the U.S. are rated as “structurally deficient” by the U.S. Department of Transportation. And, the Chairman of the House Transportation Committee recommends as a remedy a new gas tax for a new highway trust fund for bridge repair. But, Congress has been raiding existing trust funds for years for pet projects. And, Americans are paying too much at the pump already.

The real remedy lies in the answer to this question: How many millions of dollars were spent on bike paths and parking garages that could have been spent on bridge inspection and restoration? It may not make for a good photo op, but safety and routine infrastructure protection must return to the top of our funding priorities list.

When I first came to Congress, I drafted a bill know as the STATE (Surface Transportation and Taxation Equity) Act. My bill builds a whole new paradigm for funding important infrastructure projects by restoring states’ authority to set priorities for spending transportation. Authority would be wrested from Washington politicians who don’t drive our roads, don’t know our bridges, and are far removed from our state-specific needs.

Under the STATE Act, funding raised by New Jersey gas taxes would stay in New Jersey to improve driving conditions for New Jerseyans. The top-down approach that we’ve been using – New Jersey taxpayers sending their money to Washington where a portion was eaten up in bureaucracy and an even larger portion was transferred to other states before returning 92% back to the Garden State – hasn’t worked. And, it’s time for a fresh approach.

The Minnesota tragedy demonstrates that there are consequences that go beyond just wasting taxpayer money – misappropriation can cost lives. Congress needs to set priorities in its spending. Money should go first to necessities, like structurally unsafe infrastructure. And, states that know the needs of their residents should be given greater authority in determining how these priorities are set.

U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett is a three- term Republican from the fifth district of New Jersey.

WAGG-NJ

2007-08-23T01:22:00.000-04:00

Half of the population in New Jersey and 57% of the total registered voters in the State are women. Why, then, do women comprise only 23 seats in our 120-seat Legislature and do not hold a single seat in our 13-member Congressional delegation? That puts New Jersey near the bottom of the list nationwide when it comes to the number of women holding elected office in a State Legislature. For a State that is more progressive in many ways than others, New Jersey lags far behind on this score. Fortunately, there is one group trying to change that: Women Advocating for Good Government, or WAGG.

Two years ago, WAGG was formed to help increase the representation of women in elected office in New Jersey. According to WAGG’s website, Women Advocating for Good Government is a bi-partisan organization whose mission, “is to elect progressive women to the NJ legislature and other levels of government, to educate women in the political process, to empower women to take political party leadership positions, and to raise funds to support these goals.” The current chair of the organization is Myra Terry, CEO of The Women’s Fund for New Jersey and former President of NOW-NJ. She is joined on the Board by former Assemblywoman Rose Marie Heck and lobbyist and former Chief of Staff for Bob Menendez, Kay LiCausi, among others.

It remains to be seen whether WAGG is successful in its mission. Other groups in New Jersey have attempted to achieve similar goals and have met with limited success. However, WAGG has a strong bi-partisan base from which to work and experienced leadership from both sides of the political aisle that may help it to achieve its goals.

While WAGG’s website is currently in development, you can learn more about the organization at www.waggnj.org

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Bush Rules will Undercut SCHIP

2007-08-21T14:05:00.000-04:00

By Senator Joe Vitale
New Jersey is one of many states around the nation that recognizes what a hardship health care costs can be on low or middle-income families. In New Jersey, we’ve sought to increase support for families struggling to meet soaring healthcare costs. The SCHIP partnership of Federal and State resources has worked to increase access to care and the well-being of children.

President Bush’s newest rules, through an administrative short cut jeopardizes efforts to protect the health and safety of millions of kids around the nation. Once again, his Administration has shown that it is out of touch with the needs of America’s families, pushing a right-wing agenda which does little to help children in need.

These new rules continue the President’s failed track record on needed health care resources. He has threatened to veto pending Congressional legislation which would actually expand resources to promote greater coverage for the uninsured.

While I’m confident that Congress has the votes to override the wrong-headed plans of the President when it comes to SCHIP, the Administration needs to get its priorities in order when it comes to vital health care safety net programs. Imposing impossible standards to qualify for S-CHIP expansion only shows that the President is hoping to bury this needed program under mountains of bureaucratic red tape. New Jersey, and the nation, deserves better.

Joe Vitale is a State Senator representing New Jersey's 19th Legislative District. The Senator is the Deputy Majority Leader and Chairman of the Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee

Bleeding Disorders in Women Need Review by Senator Joe Vitale

2007-08-16T13:23:00.000-04:00

Diagnosing and treating blood disorders is a necessary and worthwhile investment for New Jersey. Bleeding Disorders in women are among the most common and neglected type in the State of New Jersey. The neglect of such disorders only leads to substantial medical, financial, and psycho-social problems for the effected women and the Public Health Sector of New Jersey.

The New Jersey Governor’s Task Force on Women with Bleeding Disorders, established by former Governor McGreevey by Executive Order #51 in 2004, has investigated female bleeding disorders in hopes of solving the dilemma. The force has met every four to six weeks since November 16, 2004. The findings of the Task Force are and their recommendations are basic, yet have a far reaching potential.

As for the recommended findings of the Task Force, if we are going to decrease bleeding disorders and begin effective diagnose of this widely untreated problem we must implement new medical guidelines. The first of which must be medical and educational guidelines providing reasonable and acceptable criteria to clinically define and determine an irregular menses. Additionally there is a need to develop laboratory testing guidelines for performing hemostasis testing. Launching a Public Awareness campaign target toward women to educate the public about normal and abnormal menses and other bleeding disorders caused by excessive menstrual cycles is also essential.

Additionally, to ensure that the recommendations of the Task Force are implemented it is suggested the Governor’s Task Force on Women with Bleeding Disorders be sustained for an additional period of 18 months. The Task Force has also requested permission to establish the following sub-committees to address these specific recommendations, a Medical/Scientific Sub-Committee, an Education Sub-Committee, and a Public Awareness Committee. Each of theses sub-committees would be in charge of implementing and establishing set goals and standards as per the three Task Force recommendations.

Ultimately, the goals of Health Care officials must be to ensure appropriate testing and medical attention to women with Bleeding Disorders. Since many women go undiagnosed and misdiagnosed throughout the State, it is within our best interest to continue the task force and to implement the aforementioned recommendations. Medical professionals and women alike need information not only on the disorders themselves but also of the highly dangerous consequences of the disorders going untreated. If we can increase both public and medical attention the dilemma many women face it is possible to prevent, or successfully treat many of the painful and devastating consequences related to Female Blood Disorders.

Where are the “independent” Politicians?

2007-08-15T23:21:00.000-04:00

Approximately one-third of the electorate is composed of people who do not ascribe to either the Democratic or Republican Party, while the other two-thirds are almost evenly split between the Democratic and Republican parties. The Independents are generally people who believe the Parties are too partisan, too close-minded, and are beholden to special interests. They have a point. In fact, if Democrats and Republicans were polled, a sizeable number would likely agree with the Independents but feel they have no other alternative.

Politicians of both persuasions continue to adhere to the lines drafted by the Party big-wigs and consultants. Once they commit to the Party position, they do not look back and do not question it. Only when it changes or electoral support for the position softens to an intolerable degree do they change their stance. Remarkably, the American people return these politicians to office approximately 90% of the time. How can our citizens then bemoan the conduct of officeholders when they themselves continue to re-elect them? The answer lies in the fact that there really is no viable alternative for citizens at this point in time. Given the two choices of committed partisans, they can either vote for one of them or stay home. Increasingly, they choose to stay home and who could blame them given the choice, or lack thereof, they currently have.

There are significant policy differences between a Democratic and Republican candidate, and your vote really does matter. However, your vote does not matter as much as it could if there were another viable option besides the Democratic and Republican Parties.

A credible third party would provide a choice for people, would cause politicians of all persuasions to be more open-minded and thoughtful out of electoral necessity, would cause an enlightenment among some partisans towards a more transparent and ethical government, and would force the Democratic and Republican Parties to rethink their strategies. The days of divide and conquer would likely be over since the divided could readily unite behind a third-party candidate and a campaign of fear and smear could backfire if two other options were available for voters. Neither the Democratic nor Republican parties could take their own voters for granted and both would have to work incredibly hard to peel Independents away from the third-party candidates, causing both parties to tone down their partisan rhetoric, appeal to the middle, and be forced to develop more thoughtful ideas and positions.

Of course, a credible third-party brings with it its own problems. A third-party would weaken the traditional Party system which is currently the general vehicle for voter turnout, citizen mobilization, and political information. However, grassroots organizations and blogs are good replacement vehicles and will only grow stronger in the years ahead. Third party candidates elected to office could wreak havoc by holding up legislation, nominations, and fiscal appropriations. But then again, Democrats and Republicans do this all the time, so such a fear is not dependent on third-party existence.

The truth is that the birth of a credible third party in the 21^st Century might not be a bad thing. In fact, it may be just what our nation needs at this time in our history. Only by having open-minded officials who are freed of purely partisan agendas will a healthy and thoughtful political dialog ensue and our nation’s most pressing needs be met. A third party may help accomplish such feats.

Newark’s Tipping Point?

2007-08-11T09:05:00.000-04:00

By: Murray Sabrin

The killing of three college students last week and the grave wounding of another young lady were horrific “hate crimes.” All criminals are “hateful” because they do not respect the lives of others and/or their property. If all human beings embraced the values of “Thou shalt not steal” and “Thou shalt not murder,” crime would disappear.

Until that glorious day arrives in Newark and other crime infested urban centers around the nation, I recommend that Mayor Booker initiate “Operation Take Back Our Streets.” The people of Newark deserve no less than a safe city where all children can grow up to realize their potential, where all workers are safe coming and going to work, and visitors are safe walking any street in the city. OTBOS has several components.

• Declare a crime emergency and flood the city’s high crime areas with local, county and state police. If necessary, request Governor Corzine call up a limited contingent of the National Guard to support local law enforcement.
• Install high intensity lights in high crime areas and key intersections.
• Organize massive citizen patrols throughout the city.
• Create education programs about the sanctity of life, respect for women and private property.
• Churches should mobilize their congregants to create programs to improve the skills of youngsters so they will become part the economic and social fabric of our society. In other words, Volunteers in Education could be launched at no cost to taxpayers.
• Create intensive rehabilitation programs in the community for juvenile offenders as well as first time convicted adult criminals so they can become productive members of society. Let them know in no uncertain terms that they will not get a second chance.
• If any released convict should commit a crime, the repeat offender will not be sent to prison where he learns how to become a better criminal and is a dehumanizing institution. Repeat offenders will lose their citizenship, even if they are native born Americans, and deported. Isn’t it better to rid our society of potential killers than risk the possibility they make kill any more youngsters or adults In short, “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”
• Decriminalize drug use. Drug use is enough punishment.
• Eliminate the drug gangs in Newark and other New Jersey cities by calling on Governor Corzine and President Bush to end drug prohibition. How many more young people have to die because of a failed social policy? You know it Mayor and so does the Governor, drug probation increases crime because of turf wars.
• Restore the Second Amendment in Newark, so law-abiding citizens can protect themselves and their families on the streets.

Some (many) people may find several of the above recommendations draconian, unrealistic, dumb or ridiculous. That’s to be expected. However, a very smart fellow who taught at Princeton, Albert Einstein, once said, 'Insanity is when you do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result'.......

The people of Newark and New Jersey are looking to Cory Booker for leadership. The people of Newark deserve to live in a city where everyone can walk the streets without fear of being assaulted or killed. Mr. Mayor the ball is in your court.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is a finance professor in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, a columnist for www.usadaily.com and a blogger for www.njvoices.com.

Minnesota Bridge Collapse: Financial Starvation Rears Its Ugly Head

2007-08-09T20:54:00.000-04:00

The recent collapse of an interstate bridge in Minnesota that sent a number of people to their deaths is a chilling reminder of the financial starvation of our nation’s needs here at home, needs that were tragically and poignantly showcased during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Meanwhile, we squander hundreds of millions of dollars on domestic bureaucratic programs, such as No Child Left Behind and the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill, that fail to adequately meet the needs of our citizens. We also export billions overseas to fight in a war that was initiated because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction that never existed and to fight terrorism that has since exponentially increased. In the meanwhile, political posturing rules the day at the White House and in Congress. Where are our priorities? Who is minding the store?

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, the American people saw, virtually for the first time, the antiquated state of our nation’s infrastructure and how the systematic underfunding of our nation’s most pressing needs resulted in death and devastation. The Minnesota bridge collapse, while much smaller in both size and scope, hammers home the same message: because of priorities that are out of whack for a sizeable majority of Americans, our government is not doing what it could to secure our nation, its citizens, and its future. The bridge in question had been inspected during the past few years and declared structurally deficient, but was not repaired.

The poor state of our nation's infrastructure is not purely a Republican Party problem. Yes, a great deal of blame should fall on the President and the Republican majorities that controlled Congress until 2006. However, where are the Democrats? Except for a small minority, few spoke up from 2000 to 2006 regarding the urgent needs our nation faces, and now that they are in the majority, they have done little to meet our needs; instead, they engage in political posturing and finger pointing. Is it any wonder that both the President and Congress have such low approval ratings?

Is it too much to expect that when we drive on an interstate highway, it will not collapse because of years of neglect? It is similarly not too much to expect that when our fellow Americans are dying in a catastrophic hurricane, our government assist them quickly and competently. It is time for our elected representatives to start making government work for its citizens while its citizens are working to pay taxes to fund the government. Nothing less is acceptable.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Republicrats Keep Expanding the Welfare State

2007-08-04T08:27:00.000-04:00

By: Murray Sabrin

On Wednesday, the House of Representatives passed an extension of the State Children’s Health Insurance Program, known as SCHIP, along party lines that would increase funding by $50 billion over the next five years to $75 billion ($15 billion per year), from the $5 billion per year the federal government is currently spending.

The Senate version overwhelmingly passed on Thursday, 68-31, calls for a $35 billion hike to $60 billion over five years, or $12 billion per year. The program would be financed by increases in tobacco taxes and cuts in subsidies to private Medicare insurance plans for seniors.

Governor Corzine was in Washington D.C. on Wednesday lobbying his former colleagues to pass the more expensive SCHIP version passed by the House. Corzine wants a huge boost in the federal government’s commitment, because the funds earmarked for New Jersey would insure about half of the 250,000 uninsured children and another 10,000 to 15,000 adults in New Jersey.

That would mean more state spending at a time when New Jersey is broke. The feds and state government split the cost of SCHIP—65/35. So where will the money come from to enroll more children and adults in New Jersey? Moreover, if the SCHIP program is expanded, another 3 million more children would be covered nationally. Lawmakers want to pass an extension of the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which covers 6.6 million children, ASAP because it is scheduled to expire on Sept. 30.

If either the House or Senate version is passed extending SCHIP, President Bush has threatened to veto the bill as too expensive. He wants only a $5 billion increase in the program over five years. In other words, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle in Congress and President Bush agree on the basic premise of SCHIP: the federal government should subsidize medical insurance for low and middle-income children. In short, both the Democrats and the Republicans want to enlarge the welfare state. They just debate how fast the welfare state should grow.

Instead, the debate in Congress should focus on a more fundamental proposition: Why are the federal government and state governments responsible of the well being of children? Aren’t parents supposed to be responsible for their children’s welfare? If you answer yes, then we as a society should create nongovernmental, nontaxpayer funded organizations in all localities to provide low cost or free healthcare for uninsured families. (More about this in future blogs.)

Regrettably, the goal of America’s political elites is to give us government funded universal health care on the installment plan, because they knew decades ago the American people would not embrace a total government takeover of health care in one fell swoop. Their strategy has been working brilliantly, so far. First, they gave us Medicare and Medicaid in 1965, SCHIP in 1997, prescription drugs for Medicare recipients in 2003, and now they want a major expansion SCHIP.

If President Bush does veto a substantial expansion of SCHIP this year, the Democrats will use his veto as a key campaign issue in 2008. And if the Democrats win the presidency next year and retain control of the Congress as well, government spending on healthcare will increase substantially in 2009 and bring us closer to a total government control over health care.

As one well known satirist said many years ago, “If you think health care is expensive now, wait until it is free.”

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business and executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also blogs for the Star-Ledger twice a week, www.nj.com/njvoices. Sabrin writes a weekly column every Monday for www.usadaily.com.

“Christmas Tree” Grants

2007-08-01T23:19:00.000-04:00

Recently, State Senator Joseph Coniglio of Bergen County was informed that he is a target in an investigation by the United States Attorney’s Office into the now-infamous “Christmas Tree” grants provided by the New Jersey State Legislature. “Christmas Tree” grants are legislative grants added on to the State budget by legislators during the final days and hours before the budget is adopted, to aid particular constituencies or organizations, often located in their legislative district or employing friends or relatives of the legislators. In Coniglio’s case, a “Christmas Tree” grant of at least $1.6 million was allegedly provided to the Hackensack University Medical Center shortly after the Center hired the Senator as a plumbing contractor at a salary of $5,000 per month. There are two important aspects of the “Christmas Tree Scandal” that the mainstream media has been overlooking.

First, the concept of tacking items on to the budget right before passage has been around for many, many years and is something that occurs at all levels of government: local, state and federal, throughout the country. It is not the addition of these items that is the thrust of the problem; it is that some of these items have been added for groups or organizations that have more than a constituent relationship with the legislators in power. Some of these groups or organizations have provided jobs or contracts to the legislators themselves or to the relatives or close friends of the legislators, and have done so in close proximity to the awarding of these “Christmas Tree” grants. At the very least, this is an appearance of impropriety; more likely, it is corruption.

Second, the awarding of “Christmas Tree” grants has been trumped up by the mainstream media as a problem of the New Jersey Democratic Party. There are two reasons that the Democratic Party is bearing the brunt of these attacks. First, they hold a slim majority in the State Legislature and therefore have the ability to award such grants since without their votes, the budget probably would not pass. Second, it was only until recently and only when the Democrats controlled Trenton that these “Christmas Tree” grants to organizations and constituencies that have more than a constituency relationship to legislators are being investigated. If the U.S. Attorney’s Office had launched similar investigations while Republicans controlled the New Jersey State Legislature, it would likely have turned up similar instances of these grants being awarded to those providing contracts and jobs to legislators and their relatives. Furthermore, if the Republican Party controlled the New Jersey State Legislature and thus controlled the budgeting process, it would be the Republican Party in the mainstream media’s cross-hairs because they would behave no differently.

The truth is that the “Christmas Tree” grants provided to organizations with a “special relationship” to a legislator are nothing new. This practice has been going on for decades, under both Republican and Democratic majorities. It is only now that it is being investigated that New Jersey residents have learned of this shady practice. Corruption in New Jersey, or elsewhere, is not a Democratic Party issue. It is an issue deeply rooted in the conduct of both political parties. Only when the citizens and the media comprehend this will any kind of true and meaningful reform take place.

Corzine’s Anti-Poverty Plan

2007-07-28T06:10:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

Last Wednesday, the Star-Ledger reported (“N.J. slips as a place where children thrive”) the number of poor children is increasing faster in New Jersey than in the rest of the nation. As the article points out, New Jersey’ slipped from third place in 2004 to ninth place in the ranking of the Kids Count Data Book--a survey of child well being--primarily because of an increase in child poverty. However, the survey also highlighted some bright spots, namely, a drop in teen births and a decline in infant deaths.

In response to the Kids Count report, Cecelia Zalkind of the Association for Children of New Jersey stated, “In Camden, two out of three children live in poverty. I wish Governor Corzine would address this head-on.”

Have no fear, Governor Corzine will address the children in poverty issue with the same gusto he is known for tackling other social and economic issues: government mandates. If there are too many children living in poverty, then Governor Corzine will soon issue an executive order limiting the number of children poverty stricken parents can have. Presto! In one stroke of the pen, the number of children living in poverty will decline in the Garden State.

For example, if a couple is at the poverty level, they will be forbidden by the State to have a child until they rise above the poverty level. If a couple is above the poverty level, they will have to demonstrate that having a child will not push them below the poverty level. All couples just above the poverty level would be limited to one child. The Department of Children and Families will enforce this new, bold regulation.

If anyone thinks this policy is draconian, think again. It has worked for the Chinese. Their one child policy is working miracles in the People’s Republic. In fact, the one child per couple is having huge economic and environmental benefits. The Chinese economy is booming under a one child policy. The environment is improving. Fewer Chinese children being born means less demand for chop sticks. Less chopsticks means more trees saved, which means more carbon dioxide absorbed by forests and other forms of vegetation. Hence, less global warming.

A one or no child policy in New Jersey would mean fewer disposable diapers filling up our landfills, less trips to pediatricians to treat infants for sore throats and ear infections, and less demand for new schools. Not only would a one or no child policy be good for New Jersey’s environment, it would free up doctors to see the really sick people in our society, the elderly. In addition, fewer children would reduce the demand for classroom space. Hence, property taxes would be kept in check.

In one bold government mandate, Governor Corzine would reduce poverty in New Jersey, improve the environment, reduce healthcare costs, and put a lid on property tax hikes. With a record like this, no Republican would dare challenge Governor Corzine in 2009.

Inasmuch as Governor Corzine would not have to spend tens of millions of dollars in another costly political campaign, wouldn’t such a generous governor give me a modest commission for my proposal? After he wins reelection in 2009, Governor Corzine could then launch his 2012 presidential bid. Save me a seat at the Inaugural Ball.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business and Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy, Ramapo College of New Jersey. He is a contributing columnist for NJBIZ and a weekly columnist for www.usadaily.com. Sabrin also writes for the Star-Ledger’s blog, NJ Voices.

Frank Lautenberg: Competency and Integrity, Not Age, Will Determine His Future

2007-07-26T01:15:00.000-04:00

In recent weeks, a good deal of mainstream media ink has been spilled discussing Senator Lautenberg's age and whether it makes him vulnerable to defeat in November 2008. During the same time, polling reveals that New Jersey residents are concerned about his age, but not enough to toss him out of office. Conventional wisdom remains that he will run unopposed in the Democratic Party and win in the general election in 2008. The Senator’s age is not the issue; it is his competence and his integrity. Under either test, he currently passes with flying colors making his age immaterial.

To date, Senator Lautenberg has exhibited a firm grasp of the troubling issues confronting our nation and has been a steady and powerful voice for the residents of our State. He has introduced common sense legislation to provide the Attorney General with the power to deny a suspected terrorist the ability to purchase firearms. Whether it is working to improve the environment or fighting the deceptive practices formerly engaged in by the tobacco industry, Senator Lautenberg has been a champion of the consumer and of our residents.

As an elected official who is unbossed, he brings a level of integrity to New Jersey and federal politics that is too often lacking. Yes, he has his faults: his questioning of Congresswoman Millicent Fenwick’s fitness for office when she was 72 and ran against him in 1982 was a blemish on his otherwise nearly spotless political record. It gives rise to a charge of hypocrisy now that he is running for re-election at the ripe old age of 83. However, throughout his service as a United States Senator, Lautenberg has been able to avoid the ethical pitfalls that have befallen many politicians in our State and has established a solid reputation for honesty and forthrightness.

That said, Lautenberg's competency and integrity will be tested in the months ahead. As long as he demonstrates that his age has not impacted either of these qualities and he does not falter with regard to these characteristics, he will likely be re-elected in a romp However, should he falter in either category, it is his competence or integrity that will impact his candidacy, not his age.

Local governments reduced to begging

2007-07-24T19:36:00.000-04:00

by Steve Lonegan

The state budget was passed June 23, more than four weeks ago. But today, July 24, hundreds of towns are still waiting for a decision on extraordinary aid applications. Final budgets cannot be adopted and tax bills issued without these awards. The result is many towns are forced to issue estimated tax bills or float Tax Anticipation Notes (short term debt). Both alternatives are costly to taxpayers and unnecessary if the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) would do their job in a timely manner.

Yet it hasn’t. Why? Because government bureaucrats and political hacks are still wrestling over backroom deals, deciding which communities “qualify” for these “aid” awards.

With no public hearings or guidelines for how this money is divided, the system is purely political. In a desperate move, in the midst of this process, State Treasurer Bradley Abelow sent a letter to every governing body in the state advising them: “We urge you to carefully consider how far you want to go in putting yourself and your community on record on this critical issue before we have a concrete proposal from the Governor to debate” - before acting on a letter from Republican Minority Leader Alex DeCroce requesting resolutions opposing the Governor’s “Asset Monetization” scheme.

Poor timing, considering the status of aid applications. In a purely political arena this maneuver has all the trappings of political strong arm tactics.

Last week Governor Corzine was able to find $6.4 Million of our taxpayer dollars to show HIS appreciation for Cooper Hospital’s treatment after HIS accident. I say if Governor Corzine wants to be generous he should use his own money, not yours and mine.

That $6.4 Million, by the way, is equivalent to almost the entire operating budget of more than one hundred of the states’ municipalities. Governor Corzine promised to change the way the state did business under the McGreevey-Codey Administration. He has. He’s made a bad situation even worse.

Steve Lonegan is the Mayor of Bogota, NJ, and Executive Director of Americans for Prosperity - New Jersey. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP Foundation) are committed to educating citizens about economic policy and mobilizing those citizens as advocates in the public policy process. He is a prolific writer, having been published in newspapers and blogs. He currently has a book in pre-publication on the impact of New Jersey state government on the well being of the taxpayers of the state, where he offers solid and workable solutions.

Ban Dual Office Holding Once-and-for-All

2007-07-21T05:35:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

Although the Legislature passed a bill to ban dual office holding, current members were “grandfathered,” so they will continue to double dip, or in the case of Senator Nicholas Sacco of North Bergen, to triple dip. Senator Sacco, in addition to serving in the state senate, is assistant school superintendent in North Bergen, where he is also the mayor. His annual income is more than $200,000 per year. This is the most egregious example in New Jersey of office holding and public sector employment run amok.

According to a new report by the New Jersey Policy Perspective, dual office holding creates less accountability and conflicts of interest, among other issues. The report includes the following findings:

600 men and women elected to municipal office have at least one other job on a public payroll besides their elected positions-more than 30 percent are employed in public education either as teachers or administrators; 20 percent work in county government; 14 percent for public authorities.
In the state's 10 most populous municipalities, just over half of council members have their day jobs in the public sector.
At least 56, or more than 40 percent, of the state's 137 county freeholders hold at least one other public sector job. Some 23 freeholders hold another elected office.
A dozen men and women in the 40-member State Senate in 2006 held at least one non-elected public job, and 26 of the 80-member State Assembly earn at least part of their living from public sector employment.

While the report does an excellent job of reporting the facts, the authors do not make an obvious conclusion about dual office holding: Government spending and hence taxes are high in the Garden State, because lawmakers have a vested interest in increasing the role of government at all levels.

Let’s face it, if an individual is a state legislator, freeholder, or council member, and holds a public sector job, there is a built in self interest to vote for more spending, taxes, and debt. The history of the last ten years or more confirms that higher taxes, more spending and more debt have been enacted by the state legislature, while municipal spending including local school budgets have outpaced inflation, in general. In short, fiscal restraint is just not in the cards, if lawmakers are on the public payroll, or their law firms receive government contracts.

Admittedly, dual office holding, does not “explain” all the increase in taxes, spending, and borrowing. However, I would wager that dual office holders vote consistently to increase spending. And that’s one of the reasons why taxes are so high in New Jersey. In addition, dual office holding should be banned because being a full time school administrator, or having a supposedly full time job in another public sector, should require an individual’s full time attention.

If Governor Corzine wants to be known as a “reformer,” he would demand that the Legislature end all dual office holding immediately once-and-for-all. But then again, the governor needs the votes of dual office holders to increase spending and to create new government programs.

Ending dual office holding could be one small step that could put a brake, however, slight on the growth of government in New Jersey. The beleaguered New Jersey taxpayer should welcome this change in the way we are governed. Unfortunately, replacing dual office holders with other big government officials would, in the final analysis, maintain the status quo of high taxes and profligate spending.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also writes a blog twice a week for the Star-Ledger, http://www.nj.com/njvoices/. Sabrin’s weekly column on national issues will soon appear on www.usadaily.com.

Fiscal Priorities in Washington

2007-07-20T18:02:00.000-04:00

This week I fought to restore fiscal priorities in the federal budget by introducing amendments to the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Appropriations Act to transfer funds from redundant federal programs into proven medical research on cancer and autism.

Click here to read more about these efforts:

Rep. Garrett Fights to Restore Fiscal Priorities in the Federal Budget Offers Amendments to Expand Research on Cancer and Autism - July 20th, 2007

Some Observations

2007-07-19T01:37:00.000-04:00

Recently, President Bush commuted the 30-month sentence of Scooter Libby, Vice-President Cheney’s former Chief of Staff and an accomplished attorney. Libby had been convicted of lying to the grand jury. By commuting his sentence, the President ensured that Libby would serve no jail time. This is the same President who has presided over a Justice Department that prosecuted others when they lied before grand juries. In one such case, a person was sentenced to more months in prison than Libby. His sentence was not commuted by the President. When the imposition of punishment is based on caprice and political considerations rather than on the common good, our system of justice is undermined. When it is the President who is undermining our nation’s system of justice, it is a national embarrassment.

The Clintons attacked President Bush for his commutation of Libby's sentence. This from a former President who recommended 140 plus pardons in his final days? Didn't he pardon a close relative as well as a wealthy tax-evading financier who happened to be a major campaign supporter/donor? The Clintons would have been better served by not commenting. Their hypocrisy with reference to the Libby issue is blatant and may give us insight regarding Hillary Clinton’s quest for the presidency.

Recently, former Newark Mayor Sharpe James was indicted. The allegations range from paying for movie tickets to taking exotic trips on the public dime, with no legitimate civic purpose, to arranging favorable land deals for a female companion and other insiders. These alleged actions are a blatant abuse of the public trust. Former Governor Codey said that the indictment of James marked a “sad day.” The fact that James was indicted was not sad. What is sad was that James was allowed to get away with his behavior for nearly twenty years. What is twice as disturbing was that Democrats in the State Senate and the New Jersey Democratic Party looked the other way regarding the culture of corruption allegedly practiced by James, even once the accusations were publicly detailed in newspapers throughout the State. While Mr. James is presumed innocent until proven guilty, virtually no Democratic leader had even questioned his conduct. Finally, State Democratic Chairman Joe Cryan this past week called for the resignations of both Sharpe James and Wayne Bryant from the State Senate. Cryan’s pronouncement was seen as a shock by the political establishment; they expressed surprise and indignation that the head of the Party would publicly inveigh against elected members of his own Party. The Party would benefit immensely by continued courage on the part of Mr. Cryan and the leadership of the Democratic Party in confronting the issue of corruption and the alleged “few bad apples spoiling the crop.”

Finally, the blight on the Bush Administration became more intense this past week when the President told former White House Counsel Harriet Miers not to testify regarding a Congressional inquiry into the firing of United States attorneys. When a President uses his bully pulpit to defy Congress, suppress information, and chill free speech, it marks a cratering of his presidency. With nearly two years to go in his Presidency, the only question that remains is "how much lower can his approval ratings go?"

The Left Marches On Part 4: “Asset Monetization” will fund Dag’s Vision

2007-07-16T22:54:00.000-04:00

By Steve Lonegan

During his budget address last March Governor Corzine confessed that his childhood hero is Dag Hammarskjold, the father of the planned central economy, or modern day socialism. This system is the polar opposite of the free-market philosophy that drove America to be the most prosperous nation the world has ever seen.

Hammarskjold dreamt of a day when central planners would guide every aspect of the economy, including redistribution of wealth and allocation of property. This philosophy holds that those on the lower end of the income spectrum have a claim on the earnings and property of the producers. The basic concept here is to make the central planners responsible for “leveling” all citizens to the lowest common denominator. The Central Planner philosophy has been implemented in Sweden and is responsible for many of Fidel Castro’s and Hugo Chavez’s policies.

It is no wonder that later on in his budget address the Governor would state, “If we want Universal Health Care, Universal Pre-K and Affordable Housing and if we want to compensate property owners for the loss of value in the Highland areas we must asset monetize our toll roads.” All of these programs are managed by Trenton’s central planners and replace the free market with taxpayer funded bureaucracies.

The problem: they will cost money-and lots of it. Governor Corzine and I agree with one critical thing. We can’t afford any of these leftist programs. Herein lies the difference - I don’t want any of these programs, and don’t believe the vast majority of hard working taxpayers do, either. Governor Corzine, knowing taxpayers couldn’t possibly afford to launch these Central Planning nightmares, understands that if he is going to succeed he needs lots of cash quick. The only answer is a clever trick called “Asset Monetization.”

In other words, pawn off the revenue from the toll roads for quick cash to initiate the largest expansion of the entitlement state in New Jersey history. Once the programs are in place, complete with thousands of union employees, the quick cash will run out in two to three years leaving the ongoing cost of these business and job destroying programs to be paid by, you guessed it, the taxpayer.

The message this radical expansion of the entitlement state sends in a competitive world that recognizes the power of the free-market and individual opportunity and responsibility, is simple - New Jersey is rolling out the red carpet for all those seeking “free” government programs. The second part of the message is, if you want to build a business and keep the lion’s share of your earnings for your family and future, don’t come to New Jersey. Governor Corzine is driving out the goose that laid the golden egg and turning New Jersey into a magnet state for welfare recipients.

Steve Lonegan is the Mayor of Bogota, NJ, and Executive Director of Americans for Prosperity - New Jersey. Americans for Prosperity (AFP) and Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFP Foundation) are committed to educating citizens about economic policy and mobilizing those citizens as advocates in the public policy process. He is a prolific writer, having been published in newspapers and blogs. He currently has a book in pre-publication on the impact of New Jersey state government on the well being of the taxpayers of the state, where he offers solid and workable solutions.

The Sharpe James Indictment: What Did They Know and When Did They Know It?

2007-07-14T19:12:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

On Thursday former Newark mayor and state senator Sharpe James was indicted on 33 counts, “including 17 counts of defrauding the residents of Newark with credit cards, four counts of fraud involving local government receipt of federal funds, three counts of improperly favoring girlfriend Tamika Riley through the fraudulent sale of city properties, one count of conspiring to use the U.S. mail to defraud the public, four counts of housing assistance fraud, three counts of tax fraud, and one count of tax evasion.”

Professing his innocence, James spent Friday “politicking” in the streets of Newark to win the hearts and minds and eventually the sympathy of the citizens who will judge the charges brought against His Honor and his former female companion. Whether the trial of Sharpe James will be New Jersey’s version of the O.J. Simpson trial more than a decade ago remains to be seen. O.J. was acquitted by a jury of “his peers” even though the evidence was overwhelming that he killed his former wife and her male friend.

Will the defrauded people of Newark, according to the U.S. Attorney’s office, listen to the evidence with an open mind? And if the facts are beyond a reasonable doubt, will a jury vote to convict the Sharpe James on all or most of the counts brought against him?

Meanwhile, if the allegations against Sharpe James are true, who else knew about his corrupt actions? In politics, corruption cannot be hidden from the state’s political elite. In short, what do former and current elected officials, from the governor’s office on down, hear or know about corrupt practices in Newark?

For example, when I was a candidate for governor in 1997 I was told by a reliable source and confirmed by members of the media that Jim McGreevey was either gay or bisexual. It would seem to me then that politicians who worked with him would also have known about McGreevey’s sexual behavior. Therefore, it was no surprise to me when Governor McGreevey announced on August 12, 2004 he was “a gay American.” In fact, a member of the Legislature told me he and his colleagues knew about McGreevy’s sexual preferences for years, when Jim served in the Assembly and then in the Senate.

McGreevey's homosexuality is not the issue. The fact that he then appointed an unqualified individual, with whom he had an alleged affair, to be the state's homeland security director, demonstrated how the personal lives of politicians affect their public responsibilities

As far as the alleged corrupt practices in Newark are concerned, several years ago I was told by two businessmen independently of each other that contractors had to “deliver brown bags of cash to City Hall” to do business in Newark. They did not participate in this practice but knew individuals who were told to pay up or forget about any work in the city.

In addition, one contractor also said that when a city contract was made some of the “boys” from City Hall had to be given no show jobs. And if the contractor didn’t comply, his SUV or vehicle would mysteriously catch fire.

This brings me back to the point of the Sharpe James indictments. If I heard about alleged corrupt practices in Newark that were occurring during the James administration, shouldn’t the gossip through the political grapevine have alerted the State’s Attorneys General and U.S. Attorney’s to begin investigating the James administration years ago?

Honesty, truth, integrity, and justice, are supposed to be defining traits of American society. In New Jersey, given all the indictments and convictions of the past several decades, both the political class and government practices in general have a long way to go to earn the public’s trust.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy. He also writes a blog twice a week for the Star-Ledger, http://www.nj.com/njvoices/. Sabrin’s weekly column on national issues will soon appear on www.usadaily.com.

Supporting our Servicemembers

2007-07-13T12:32:00.000-04:00

By: Representative Scott Garrett

The men and women who wear the uniform sacrifice their lives, comfort, and safety to fight for the continued security of our democracy. While Americans back home in the United States benefit from our nation’s freedom, it is the servicemembers who ensure it still exists. And, the men and women who we used to know as Weekend Warriors are an increasingly important part of our every day fighting force.

Major General Glenn Rieth, Adjutant General for my home State of New Jersey, cited the increased use of our Guard units for the Global War on Terror, in a recent issue of the NJ Guard magazine, Guardslife: “This historic mobilization, the largest since World War II, confirmed there is no turning back to the days when the National Guard was considered a Strategic Reserve. We are now an Operational Force that the nation depends on today and tomorrow.”

In that same statement, General Rieth noted the historic recruitment levels for the Guard in 2006 – the second highest in history. These men and women serve out of a sense of duty and patriotism, and it is incumbent upon us to thank them with both our words and our actions.

We too often forget that when National Guardsmen or Reservists are called overseas to fight in combat, many leave behind a good-paying job, family and children. Their departure places significant financial burdens on the families they leave behind. This means that the spouses of individuals serving overseas are not only worried about the safety of their loved one, but also how the bills will be paid and the children will get fed. Coupling the financial burdens with the emotional burdens of deployment can be crippling for many of these families, and they deserve what help and support we can provide.

Service members in combat zones are afforded a special tax break for their combat pay. It seems the least that we can do for the extraordinary sacrifices they make on our behalf every day. This tax break is good public policy, but it can be better. I recently authored two bills that try to improve upon this financial assistance and ease some of the burdens military families face.

The Strengthening America’s Military Families Act of 2007 would allow for the spouses of these service members to claim that same federal income tax exemption for money they earn while their loved one is in the combat zone. The Armed Forces Tax Relief Act of 2007 would not only make the service member’s combat pay exempt from income tax, but also from payroll taxes for Medicare and Social Security, which can be significant. These brave men and women would literally earn their pay tax free.

These bills would put a little extra money into the pockets of the individuals who are risking their lives for America’s freedom and would ease the burdens that their families face every day because of the risks they take. These small tax exemptions do not compare to the sacrifices our servicemembers make for our freedom but it is a small gesture we can make to show them our support.

U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett is a three- term Republican from the fifth district of New Jersey.

Time for a Straphanger’s Campaign in New Jersey?

2007-07-13T01:01:00.000-04:00

New York PIRG has created a Straphanger's Campaign in the State that provides information to commuters, including how to best file complaints, a blog for commuters to discuss issues, and methods for them to become active in transit issues for the betterment of all riders. In New Jersey, no such organization exists to assist the approximately 800,000 daily commuters who take modes of transportation offered by New Jersey Transit every day. Given the frustrating experiences encountered on New Jersey Transit, an organization devoted to such issues would be welcomed by the commuter.

New Jersey Transit’s mission statement is “To provide safe, reliable, convenient and cost-effective transit service with a skilled team of employees, dedicated to our customers' needs and committed to excellence.” Unfortunately, regarding reliability, convenience, and cost-effectiveness, New Jersey’s public transit system comes up short.

Trains are often late with little or no information provided to commuters. When information is provided, it frequently is incorrect. Given today’s technology, there is no reason for a train traveling on a sunny day from New York to Summit, New Jersey should be overdue, unless an electrical line is down. Unfortunately, despite sunny days and full power, trains from New York to Summit and other locations are frequently late.

Overcrowding on trains is a daily occurrence. While “double-decker” trains are supposedly in operation, few are evident. Meanwhile, many commuters are forced to stand the length of their trip because of an inadequate number of seats. There is no reason why a commuter paying approximately $14 for a roundtrip ticket into New York on a train ride lasting less than an hour should have to stand for that amount of time.

Meanwhile, the cost of riding New Jersey Transit continues to increase. With a one-way ticket to New York from many locales costing as much as $8, the savings from riding public transportation diminishes. At a time when we should be encouraging public transportation to improve the environment and lessen our dependence on foreign oil, we are increasing fares for public transportation and providing inadequate service to commuters. Does this make any sense? Meanwhile, while one would expect improved services for increased fares, such improvements are not to be found.

It is time for commuters in New Jersey to organize and work for the betterment of public transportation, as fellow commuters have done in New York. Increased fares should be accompanied by improved services. Overcrowding should be limited, if not eradicated. Delays should be unusual, not the norm. Riders should be kept well-informed about transit conditions. These are simple suggestions that would resonate with commuters and cause a common bond to form.

Perhaps New Jersey PIRG or one of New Jersey's other not-for-profit organizations might be willing to take up the banner for those people having to use public transportation. With an organization to lead them, it would be incumbent upon many commuters to lend their support and be willing to get involved. Only through such involvement will positive change be possible. Currently, there is a virtual monopoly on public transportation in New Jersey and the commuters hold little, if any, power. With an organization behind them and commuters willing to have their voices heard, the scales will begin to tip in their favor and passengers using public transportation may be able to achieve some positive changes.

Gore, Corzine and the Hot Air of Global Warming

2007-07-08T06:25:00.000-04:00

Murray Sabrin

The Left in America has succeeded for nearly 200 years in implementing their agenda of collectivism-- high taxes, massive government spending, currency depreciation, widespread regulations and an interventionist foreign policy. The next frontiers for the Left to conquer are universal healthcare and combating “global warming.”

If Hillary or one of the Democrats is elected president next year, get ready for a Canadian style universal healthcare system in America. The long-time goal of the Left, since the days of Harry Truman, has been universal healthcare. Inasmuch as America’s left wingers could not takeover healthcare in one fell swoop, we have been getting universal healthcare piecemeal—Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIPs, the joint federal-state program for children. The Left, if anything, is clever. They know collectivism has to be implemented step-by-step, because the masses will not allow a total takeover of their lives. So we get collectivism on the installment plan. It has been working.

Now along comes GOP presidential candidate Ron Paul who is the only Republican who can win the presidency next year. No pro Iraq war GOP candidate can win the presidency next year, even though Hillary, Obama and most of the leading Democrats support a pre-emptive strike against Iran.

The GOP establishment is apoplectic that someone is actually challenging the welfare-warfare state, a left-wing creation that has been supported by both Republicans and Democrats. However, there are enough, I hope and pray, Americans who embrace liberty and limited government, and want to restore the Old Republic. Otherwise, in a few years, “Your papers, please,” will not be just a line from World War II movies, but a reality in America as a National ID is created to “fight terrorism.”

In addition to healthcare, the next really big agenda item for the Left is to scare the hell out of the little kids and the intellectually challenged Americans with dire predictions about rising sea levels, widespread famines, and other apocalyptic forecasts. Rather than rehash all the critiques of the global warming “threat,” see the articles posted on www.lewrockwell.com. In a nutshell, global warming is a natural occurrence on Earth and not the result of human activity, i.e., industrial civilization. This was explained in the BBC documentary, The Great Global Warming Swindle, which is posted on You Tube.

The global warming advocates’ agenda is clear: total control over business and our personal lives. If they win, we have no one to blame but ourselves. So on this day after the seventh day of the seventh month of 2007, don’t feel guilty about driving or using your air conditioner. Enjoy your life with your family and friends, and ignore the hot air of Gore, Corzine, and the rest of the fear mongers.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is Professor of Finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is Executive Director of the Center for Business and Public Policy.

On the Right Track?

2007-07-04T17:09:00.000-04:00

Although he has not yet formulated a proposal regarding the State’s toll roads, Governor Corzine’s recent announcement that he would not sell or lease them to a for-profit company or a foreign operator is a wise one. Residents of New Jersey generally opposed the sale or lease of the State’s toll roads and the Governor’s initial plans to study the issue raised Republican opposition. Given the beating Republicans have taken at the polls in recent elections in New Jersey, that Party views the sale or lease of the State’s toll roads as an issue that could resonate with voters and cause them to seriously consider voting for change in Trenton this November. Corzine’s announcement helps to blunt the impact of the Republican’s use of this wedge issue. If the sale or lease of our toll roads to a for-profit corporation or foreign operation were to take place, what would it mean to our residents? What problems could arise?

First, putting aside the Legislature’s proclivity to spend even when the resources do not exist, would the Legislature institute adequate protections for our residents to ensure that the roads were well-maintained and that the tolls would not be unreasonably increased? Since the State government has difficulty maintaining New Jersey’s toll roads now and the roads are currently under its control, is there any reason to believe they would be well-maintained if owned by a for-profit corporation or a foreign operator? Furthermore, since New Jersey has not been shy about boosting the costs of tolls, what would make anyone think that a for-profit corporation or foreign operator would be rigidly limited by that same government?

The lease or sale of New Jersey's toll roads to a for-profit corporation or foreign operator would raise serious concerns regarding consumer protection. The possibility of additional billions of dollars in the State's budget might not find its way to the intended coffer. The Governor's decision to refuse to sell or lease the roads to a for-profit corporation or a foreign operator is the right one at this time. Hopefully, his rejection of such a sale or lease is genuine and not an incumbent protection plan meant to assuage voters as we head towards the November election.