elections – Page 7

A dangerous infectionon the body politic

A very good investigative report in The Star-Ledger today asks the question: “Did ‘800-lb. gorillas’ sit on property tax reform?”

The story details the money spent by a variety of special interests to point the tax reform effort in directions that would benefit them, or at least not hurt them much.

Lobbying reports released yesterday show groups with the biggest stake in
property tax reform spent more than $1.9 million last year to influence lawmakers. At the same time, key legislators extracted nearly $569,000 in campaign contributions from the same groups.

Labor unions, the New Jersey Business and Industry Association, engineering firms — all tossed in quite a bit of change to stymie the reform efforts.

Which underscores an important reality. Real reform is unlikely unless we can reform the campaign finance system. The proposed clean elections pilot — a rather weak extension of 200’s badly flawed pilot — is not enough. A much more extensive pilot — covering at least six districts and including the primaries and third parties, as proposed by the clean elections committee — needs to be tried, with a promise of a full-legislative program being put in place by the next Assembly election.

Without it, all budgetary and tax reform efforts — along with needed consumer, environmental and labor reform legislation — will be hijacked by money.

Don’t believe me? Ask Matt Shapiro, an unpaid lobbyist for New Jersey’s 1 million tenants who was quoted in the Ledger story:

“Had we been a group that made large campaign contributions, we would have had more access,” Shapiro said. “We’ve had conversations, but we were not legitimately a part of that process.”

Any questions?

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

E-mail me by clicking here.

Conspiracy theories

Sometimes the shortest analyses are the best. Bob Rixon deconstructs, in a few words, Sen. Hillary Clinton’s offhanded smear of an unnamed Democratic opponent:

“To underscore a point, some people may be running who tell you we don’t face a real threat from terrorism,” she said. “I’m not one of them. We have serious enemies who want to do us serious harm.”

Rixon’s critique:

That’s a Cheneyism, the vague, off-handed smearish comment that holds up a frame with no photo in it. Hmm, who could she mean? Who’s the mystery idiot?

Clinton, of course, has been a round a while and knows how to play this skunky game — her “vast right-wing conspiracy” comment during her husband’s presidency may have been based in a level of truth, but was a vast overstatement designed to undercut criticism.

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

E-mail me by clicking here.

Breaking the chains

The Lawrence Township Council was supposed to introduce an ordinance tonight that would create a citizens committee that would explore publicly funded local elections in the Mercer County town. The committee would study the issue and make recommendations to the council, who would then decide whether to put a taxpayer-funded plan on the ballot.

It is a committee worth keeping an eye on, given the place that money plays in our electoral process.

As I wrote in an earlier column, campaign cash disparities in towns like Monroe and South Brunswick “amplif(ies) the major parties’ strength in both towns and mak(es) it easier for the major parties to attract donors and more difficult for the GOP — a double-whammy that perpetuates one-party politics.”

And the reliance on private donors distorts the lines of accountability, with money creating access and creating the impression — at the very least — that local politicians are on the take, leaving their decisions in question and diminishing our confidence in government.

Public financing — when combined with other reforms — can help break the link. Let’s see what Lawrence comes up with.

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

E-mail me by clicking here.

Six for three

Six candidates, three seats — with more possibly to come. Who says there is no interest in the school board?

It is early yet — and we still need to decide on whether to endorse for school board — but the crowded field is good for the township. The more voices the broader the debate — especially because of the inclusion of two Indian-Americans.

The deadline for filing is Feb. 26, so get your petitions in.

And let me know whether you think the Post should endorse. E-mail me here.

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

Two is one too many

Leave it to a bunch of politicians to find a way to water down a reform so that it doesn’t apply to them, only to those who will eventually replace them. That’s what has happened to a proposed ban on dual office-holding, which will grandfather in current members of the state Legislature and only apply to new members or those who seek a different office (an Assembly member running for Senate, for instance).

The grandfather clause may have been necessary to garner enough votes (doubtful, but for the sake of argument we’ll allow this to go uncontested), but it certainly was not the right way to go about cleaning up government.

State Sen. Tom Kean Jr. (R-Westfield) wants to change that. Kean, who lost a bruising U.S. Senate race to Robert Menendez, told the Jersey City Reporter that dual office-holding is an “‘absolute conflict of obligations’ that gives certain politicians too much power.”

There are 18 members of the state Legislature who currently hold another elected position — or 15 percent. This does not include the handful of others who serve as school superintendents and in other similar positions. This raises questions about whom they serve first — exactly the point that Kean is trying to make.

David Rebovich, managing director of the Rider University Institute for New Jersey Politics, describes Kean’s arguments this eay on PoliticsNJ:

Kean is interested in consistency, claiming that if the practice is wrong as most legislators apparently believe — after all, they do want to ban it for others — then there is no justification for grandfathering people in except political expediency and favoritism.

Beyond consistency, Kean makes several other arguments for getting rid of the practice. He believes dual office-holding leads to higher property taxes. This is a tricky point. Local officials who are also legislators will fight for more state aid for their communities and school districts. But presumably they will also tolerate more bureaucracy and public employees at the local level because they are part of the establishment there. Kean also notes that dual office-holding concentrates political power among fewer politicians which gives them a large power base from which they can thwart discussions for reform and changes in various policies.

In addition, Kean claims that holding a local and a state office creates conflicts of interest. For example, state legislators may not support policies that are good for the entire state, but not for the local political establishment, because such support may jeopardize reelection to their local office. As such, the system of checks and balances between levels of government can be compromised by dual office-holders. Will mayors who are also legislators support plans for municipal consolidation or merger
that may save taxpayers some money but cost themselves and their political allies their local government posts? Will they empower a state comptroller or other officials to flesh out wasteful and perhaps illegal spending in municipal governments or schools, or will they try to protect these jurisdictions from such scrutiny?

On these terms, the advocacy role played by legislators who are also local officials may undermine the ability of state government to exercise its constitutional authority over substate jurisdictions and to root out inefficient and ineffective policies and programs. Lastly, Kean complains that dual office-holding limits the number of people who can serve in government and its representative quality by making it harder for women and minorities too gain office. More people and different types of people in government typically mean more views expressed and perhaps a livelier, more productive dialogue about policy issues.

I’ve been rather critical of young Kean, especially for the manner in which he attacked Menendez during the campaign, helping to drag an already ugly race deeper into the gutter. But his proposal — that dual office-holders be forced to relinquish one of their elected posts in January 2008 — makes sense. I would strengthen it a bit further, though, disqualifying anyone who holds a management-level public job (school superintendent or assistant superintendent, township manager, sewer authority director, etc.) from holding a legislative office (and a county office in the county in which they work).

It’s time to make them choose.

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