War in the Middle East

Here is a report worth reading from Salon that I think avoids the stereotyping and side-taking that the mainstream outlets have fallen into. The thing that strikes me is that there was deliberate provaction of Israel, but that the response has been out of proportion to the initial provocation and that it plays into the hands of Hezbollah (see previous post).

What also strikes me is how, as with 9/11, the neo-cons are ready to use the Lebanon crisis for their own ends. As with 9/11, when they used the terror attack on the United States to start a war in Iraq, they are now taking the crisis in Lebanon and using it as a pretext for an assault on Iran. I can only hope that there are cooler and wiser heads out there this time around.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press

This should be a dead issue

A new state commission has begun the task of determining the fate of the death penalty in New Jersey. It will be holding hearings and gathering information to assess its value — whether it acts as a deterrent, whether it offers the appropriate punishment, whether it can be administered fairly.

My hope is that the commission will do as most civilized nations have already done and end capital punishment.

Several thoughts:

There is a basic moral dilemma at the heart of the debate, one outlined by the French philosopher Albert Camus in “Reflection on the Guillotine” — capital punishment is state-sanctioned and premeditated murder. It “adds to death a rule, a public premeditation known to the future victim, an organization which is itself a source of moral sufferings more terrible than death.” Camus says the death penalty is “the most premeditated of murders, to which no criminal’s deed, however calculated can be compared. For there to be an equivalency, the death penalty would have to punish a criminal who had warned his victim of the date at which he would inflict a horrible death on him and who, from that moment onward, had confined him at his mercy for months. Such a monster is not encountered in private life.”

And it is a moral tautology: It is a penalty that punishes the taking of life by taking a life — an equation that may seem logical to some but that hardens the heart of society and endorses the notion of retribution, making it more difficult to argue against vigilante justice. It is, after all, an eye for an eye.

Even if there were not moral issues at stake here — and I understand that there are many who do not follow the same moral and ethical principles that I follow — there are grave concerns about the fairness of its application and the accuracy of the judgments that impose it (given the finality of the death penalty, we have to make sure we are right and we must make sure we are not applying in a discriminatory fashion, neither of which seem possible).

It is time to follow the advice of Justice John Paul Stevens and stopping “tinkering with the machinery of death.”

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press

Budget imbalances

This story, written by Staff Writer Joseph Harvie, will be running in tomorrow’s South Brunswick Post:

The Township Council could have a public hearing on the 2006 municipal budget at its meeting Tuesday if Extraordinary State Aid figures are released by then.

A 2006 budget hasn’t been adopted because the Township Council applied for $700,000 in Extraordinary Aid.

However, the state adopted its $30.8 budget on July 8, eight days after it was due on June 30, which delayed the release of Extraordinary Aid numbers for municipalities.

Sean Darcy, a spokesman for the state Department of Community Affairs, said municipalities should expect Extraordinary Aid figures soon.

Township Public Affairs Coordinator Ron Schmalz said the township will hold a public hearing on the budget if state aid figures are released in time.

He said that if figures aren’t released, the Township Council will vote on budget amendments that will allow the township to operate without a formal budget.

The delay in adoption has also delayed third-quarter tax bills, which are usually due on Aug. 1. Tax bills will not be mailed until the Township Council adopts its budget. Residents will have 45 days after they are mailed to pay.

The Township Council introduced a $43.68 million budget in March that was $280,000 more than last year’s $43.4 million spending plan.

If adopted, the municipal tax rate would increase by 8 cents, to 60 cents per $100 of assessed valuation. Under that rate, the owner of a house assessed at the township average of $190,000 would pay $1,140 in municipal taxes, up $152 from the previous year.

The proposed plan does not include the $700,000 in Extraordinary State Aid. In order to apply for Extraordinary Aid, the township must use $4.3 million of its $4.7 million surplus, which it has done.

According to township Chief Financial Officer Joe Monzo, $385,485 represents one tax point in the township. That means $700,000 in Extraordinary Aid could mean a tax rate reduction of 1.82 cents.

Members of the council said that the budget was “a work in progress” and more cuts would be made before it is adopted.

I run the story in full to offer some context. What we are witnessing at the local level here in South Brunswick is similar to what has happened at the state level for too many years. The Township Council has been resorting to a series of one-shot approaches that have offset potential tax hikes in the past, but which are now coming due. This has left the township — considered one of the more affluent municipalities in the state — going to the state like a panhandler, hat in hand hoping for a couple of quarters in extraordinary aid to help it balance its budget without having to ask local taxpayers for too much cash. Only, the budget asks for a municipal tax hike of 11.9 percent after the state handout is included.

And it doesn’t take into account the difficult straits the township will find itself in next year as it scrambles to balance its budget without much of a surplus account or extraordinary aid.

South Brunswick Post, The Cranbury Press