Author: hankkalet

I know Hudson County gets a bad rep when it comes to politics, but you have to wonder it may just be earned.

A Star-Ledger story today explains why. Writing about the so-called “Hudson nine” (the nine legislators from Hudson County), the story says:

They don’t want the state telling towns how much they can raise taxes. They don’t want a state comptroller or county school superintendent second-guessing local officials. And they see nothing wrong with holding more than one taxpayer-funded job.

The greatest impediment to many of the property tax reform ideas backed by Gov. Jon Corzine may well be the nine Democratic legislators from Hudson County.

They were in the bull’s eye Corzine targeted in his State of the State address when he called on lawmakers to set aside parochialism and personal interest in favor of the “common good.”

But the Hudson nine — four of whom are also mayors and seven of whom hold tax-paid jobs in addition to elected office — insist the Democratic governor has asked for way too much, way too fast.

Limiting the growth of property tax levies; consolidating local governments; refiguring state aid for public schools; ending dual office-holding — all of that, they argue, means the demise of local control.

But local control is part of the problem. The 1,400-plus separate taxing entities lead to a ridiculous duplication of services and waste and create conditions in which local and county officials can create their own little fiefdoms (John Lynch, anyone?) helping drive property tax rates up.

Something needs to be done to rein this in and it must include many of the reforms to which the “Hudson nine” — along with groups like the League of Municipalities and state School Boards Association — are objecting.

But staunch opposition from Hudson — along with a critical GOP — could kill many of the reform proposals that are on the table. And it appears that much of this opposition stems from the style of politics that dominates in Hudson County.

The county superintendent plan (a bad idea, admittedly) and the ban on dual office-holding would have a direct impact in Hudson County where “four of (the nine legislators) are also mayors and seven of … hold tax-paid jobs in addi tion to elected office.”

Sen. Nicholas Sacco and Assemblyman Charles Epps oppose a bill to give county superintendents authority to veto school budgets, and another to move school budget elections to November, when more people are likely to vote.

Sacco is assistant superintendent of North Bergen schools (as well as the mayor). Epps is the state-paid superintendent of Jersey City schools. Neither returned phone calls seeking comments about the legislation.

Stack has worked against a bill to ban dual office-holding. It was written to allow current dual office- holders to keep both posts, but not if they sought election to another office.

Stack is expected to announce this week that he will run for Kenny’s Senate seat, according to three prominent Democrats, while Kenny is expected to retire. Under the bill, Stack would have to surrender his mayoral seat to serve in the Senate. Last week the bill was shelved until after the November legislative elections.

Lest anyone think I’m being hard on the folks in Hudson County, the dual office-holding ban is also meeting opposition from others — including Monroe Mayor Richard Pucci, who serves as mayor and as the executive director of the Middlesex County Improvement Authority.

As the Ledger points out, the Hudson legislators are not the only impediment to reform and their arguments against many of the proposed changes are the same arguments being made by the constituencies most likely to be affected.

It would be nice if we could fix the state’s tax woes without anyone having to sacrifice their perks, but that’s not possible. All of us are responsible for the mess and all of us are going to have to help with the cleanup.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Three miles on the treadmill at the gym in 27:06 (a 9:02 pace per mile) after a pretty intense weightlifting session. I’d consider it a good workout.

Total for week so far: 12 miles, with three more to go to meet my goal.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

Maybe there is something that Democrats can do to prevent the president from escalating the war in Iraq.

While many are considering a nonbinding resolution critical of the president’s plan — a symbolic slap, if you will, but useless as a brake on teh administration’s plans — Sens. Chris Dodd and Ted Kennedy have other ideas.

Two bills — one introducted by Sen. Dodd of Connecticutt, the other authored by Sen. Kennedy of Massachussets but still in draft form — would force the president to come back to the Senate for permission to increase troop levels.

Dodd’s bill would set a ceiling of 130,000 troops in Iraq, requiring the president to get funding permission before boosting levels.

Dodd, in making his announcement today, said:

“the issues are far too important” for nonbinding measures. “Other than expressing opposition, I felt we should do something more,” he said, calling for quick action before any troop increase becomes a fait accompli.

“The president has laid down the gauntlet by saying he is going to go forward and I don’t care what you say,” said Dodd. He argued that the authorization Congress gave Bush in 2002 to send troops to Iraq, leading to the March 2003 invasion and occupation, did not cover a situation that has since degenerated into a civil war among rival religious, ethnic and political sects.

If Democrats feel they need ammunition, they should look no farther than The Los Angeles Times. The paper today released results of a poll conducted earlier this week that showed that a majority of Americans want the soldiers brought home.

WASHINGTON — A commanding majority of Americans oppose President Bush’s decision to send more troops to Iraq and just over half the country wants Congress to block the deployment, a Times/Bloomberg poll has found.

As he seeks to chart a new course in Iraq, Bush also faces pervasive resistance and skepticism toward the U.S. commitment — more than three-fifths of those surveyed said the war was not worth fighting and only one-third approved of his handling of the conflict.

And in a striking measure of Bush’s declining credibility, half said they believed he deliberately misled the U.S. in making his case for invading Iraq.

On all three questions, these are Bush’s weakest showing in a Times poll.

Asked about Bush’s recent announcement that he would dispatch another 21,500 troops to Iraq, three-fifths said they opposed the move, while just over one-third backed it.

Even Bush’s political base, a source of support throughout his presidency, showed signs of cracking: about one-fourth of Republicans said they do not believe the war was worth fighting and a roughly equal number opposed the troop increase.

Despite the poll, I’m not hopeful that this will be enough to stop the president’s surge plan — he is, after all, a bit of a megalomaniac. But it is about time that Congress has decided to use its constitutional authorities and rein in this out-of-control presidency.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

OK. I admit it. I’m pretty bad when it comes to posting running info on a daily basis.

That said, I’ll offer two days worth of running updates — I took Monday off from the road and have run the last two days.

Tuesday: Another treadmill run, I knocked off four miles in a little less than 36 minutes, for better than a nine-minute mile pace. Felt good both before and after the run, so that’s a plus.

Wednesday: Treadmill again. I went in planning to do four miles, hoping to beat yesterday’s pace. I eaked out five miles in less than 45 minutes — I think it was about 44:35, for an 8:55-per-mile pace.

If I can do three miles each of the next two days, I’ll hit my 15-mile goal. If that occurs, I’ll shoot for 18 miles next week and then 20 miles a week for the month of February, 22 miles in March and then 25 miles a week after — which was my regular mileage about two years ago.

Knee pain and then a car accident slowed it and a variety of ailments — and a whole lot of excuses — have kept me from regaining my form. But I’m committed now.

The longterm goals are to run in the LBI run in early October with my friend Mike (an 18-mile trek from the nature conservancy to the lighthouse) and to accumulate a total of 850 miles for the year, which would be 250 more than I logged this year (my personal best was more than 1,200 a few years ago).

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick

It’s not enough that our elected officials currently work under a system in which their votes appear tied to the money they raise from contributors.

Or that many of the poeple who end up working for local, county and state agencies are the same people who fund our campaigns.

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan wants to extend this system of legalized bribery to voters.

The New York Times described the legislation this way:

Under a bill introduced this week by two Democratic legislators, everyone who votes in New Jersey would be eligible to win more than $1 million in a lottery drawing after an election.

There could be other rewards as well, like even more money or something else valuable.

To make voting even more alluring, anyone who votes in both a primary and the general election would have two chances of winning. Voters could conceivably get even more than two shots a year, depending on whether school board, municipal and fire district elections, which are often held on separate dates,
would also count.

There is no doubt that turnout could be better. As the Times points out:

Turnout has been steadily declining in the state, as it has elsewhere, with a record-low 48.5 percent of registered voters actually voting in the 2005 race for governor between Jon S. Corzine and Douglas R. Forrester.

But turning the polls into a massive lottery game? Is this what we’ve come to, a need to bribe the state’s residents to turn out at the polls? And is the best way to get an apathetic — some might say disaffected — electorate to reinsert themselves in the democratic process to turn it into a new Power Ball game?

“People say, ‘Oh gee, it’s trivializing the voting,’ ” Mr. Diegnan said. “I say just the opposite. Anything we can do to call attention and get people to vote, we should consider it. My purpose is really to bring some excitement to it.”

Excitement? Sometimes I wonder if politicians actually listen to themselves speak.

It’s not that the proposal trivializes voting — it does — but that it also trivializes the notion of civic participation and democracy itself. Democracy isn’t supposed to be about the big cash payoff (corporate donors excepted). The payoff is supposed to be an efficiently functioning government that has the people’s interest at heart. If residents of the state are not concerned enough about the people who sit on school boards, municipal governing bodies or county freeholder boards, who serve in the Legislature or as governor, then that is their prerogative.

If Mr. Diegnan were truly interested in boosting voter turnout, he’d recommend an array of other reforms, including holding elections on multiple days, moving Election Day to the weekend, allowing secure e-voting, etc.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press
The Blog of South Brunswick