Prescriptions for a cleaner New Jersey(Good-government edition)

I didn’t get a chance to read Charles Stiles’ column on Trenton’s (imperceptible) efforts at ethics reform last week because I was on vacation, but it is worth commenting on. Stiles makes it clear that the Democratic leadership has “promised us The Great Campaign Finance and Ethics Reform Crusade for 2008,” but that “as we close in on the year’s halfway mark, the accomplishments have been modest, at best.”

And he may be being generous.

Stiles says that, if the party in power was serious about reform, there are no shortage of proposals on the table, including requiring the state Election Law Enforcement Commission to monitor money contributed to personal defense funds, requiring ethics training for elected officials (Monroe does this now), allowing issue ads but requiring that candidates disclose their involvement and benefit, banning the wheeling of campaign contributions, ending dual-office holding and banning convicted ex-legislators from representing clients before local agencies.

Email me at grassroots at comcast dot net.

States take the lead

As has been the case during the last seven years, the real activity on environmental issues is coming from the states.

The latest salvo in this battle is a lawsuit filed today by 12 states — including New Jersey — the District of Columbia and New York City. The suit, according to the Associated Press, alleges that federal ozone standards are weak and will not “protect the elderly, children and people with respiratory problems.”

A bevy of environmental and health groups — Earthjustice, American Lung Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Environmental Defense Fund, National Parks and Conservation Association and the Appalachian Mountain Club — are also suing.

The suit claims that the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s new ozone standards, issued in March, “disregard(ed) the overwhelming evidence and the advice of respected experts,” according to Bernadette Toomey, president of the American Lung Association.

The new standards now require

that airborne concentrations be lowered from a maximum 84 parts per billion to 75 parts per billion.

But, as with every environmental decision under President George W. Bush, there is more to this than the setting of a tougher standard.

(A)n EPA science advisory board — and most health experts — had recommended a limit of 60 to 70 parts per billion to adequately protect the elderly, people with respiratory problems and children.

The EPA also did not go as far as the science panel had recommended in setting a separate standard to protect the environment, especially plants, forests and wildlife, from smog. The EPA lowered the standard equal to the primary standard safeguarding public health, but it rejected a more beneficial “seasonal standard” urged by conservationists.

EPA and White House officials have acknowledged that the seasonal standard had been opposed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, which oversees government regulation. The issue was settled after President Bush intervened directly on behalf of the White House staff only hours before the rule was announced.

Hence, the lawsuit:

David Baron, an attorney for Earthjustice, said the Clean Air Act “requires EPA to adopt standards strong enough to protect our lungs and our environment” and that the EPA standard fails to do so.

Toomey of the Lung Association said it “is a decision that we cannot allow go unchallenged.”

Email me at grassroots at comcast dot net.

It’s not dark yet, but it’s getting there

The season is over — if you listen to the sports talk radio callers in New York. The Mets, having played mediocre baseball (and often times just plain terrible ball), find themselves 5.5 games behind the Florida Marlins and two games under .500 — not the kind of record expected from a team with a $140 million payroll.

So, let’s just move on, right?

Not so fast. The Mets need to make some changes — which may include the axing of Willie Randolph — but writing the team off is just plain foolish.

Consider the 2007 season. On May 28 last year, three teams that would end the season in the playoffs — including the N.L. pennant winning Colorado Rockies — were under .500 and a fourth, the Phillies, was just a game over.

In fact, the four teams that would eventually qualify for the National League playoffs were a combined 16 games out of the playoff spots they eventually qualified for.

Does this mean that the Mets will find their way back? No. It just means they can.

Email me at grassroots at comcast dot net.