A letter came to light today, via politickernj, from a Somerset County Democratic state committeeman to John Wisniewski, suggesting Wisniewski resign from the NJ Assembly, and bylaws be drawn to keep elected officials from serving the state party committee forevermore. And at least one Democratic County Chair - Somerset's Peg Schaffer - is on board with that.
Frankly, that's a hard case to make. Joe Cryan, Joe Roberts and Bonnie Watson Coleman all ran the Party from the Assembly. And Asm Jay Webber runs NJ GOP. That begs the question why the hell the Dems should alter bylaws for what only may be an issue right now - if it's an issue at all.
And the public relations here is dicey. Awful, maybe. I'm sure Joel Shain - former Orange mayor, who once primaried and lost to Dick Codey - didn't intend this, but a letter asking the Democratic State Chair to demote himself and have less power than he is already perceived to have, well ...not cool. Even though, face it, with notable exceptions the Democrats have a serious swagger deficiency, despite their number advantages. That's what Shain's getting at, asking Wisniewski to choose, and pick only the Party. But I think there's another problem.
Transparency & accountability: Try to find the state committee folks who represent your county, people in Shain's position -
Or the wiki. Note: NJDSC parliamentarian Regan McGrory is thorough & very responsive to requests for info. I've asked her for that list, and I expect to post it - but I think those names should be listed on their site, and nobody should have to ask for it.
Who runs the show? The reality is that the state committee is a rubber stamp. In theory, NJDSC's primary function - and Wisniewski's - is to enact the will of its members. And committeemen like Shain are elected to express that will - our will. And the Chair's supposed to be guided, at least in part, by those locally-elected to the state Party. In practice ... very different. The state committee may have power they don't exercise, and at any rate we never hear about it. It's top-down, all the way. We know that the people running the show - really running it - are the professional Dems, the class comprised of high-level state electeds, and Democratic staffers. They're good people - don't get me wrong, from time to time, Blue Jersey even lobs a person or two into the front office - and they're fully committed, good Democrats. It's reasonable that key daily decisions are made by them - they're there every day.
The problem is, in their party capacity they're not answerable - except to each other, and for their jobs. They don't report to you. County & state committee people can be a key to change, and greater accountability, but they have to hear from the rest of us that we expect that. And the beginning of expecting them to exercise their power, is seeing who they are, and locally contributing feedback to them. And I expect the NJDSC to work overtime to promote that.
A good start ...I want more: The Party Democracy Act has been a lever to dislodge centralized control, giving party activists (on both sides) a better shot at tracking what really goes on. It's a good process. And if the state committee is actually nothing more than a rubber stamp - except on rare occasions when they make news, or shock the hell out of the party Chair - then maybe we should be asking why that is, and how actually to have our voices heard when our Party takes action, defines itself, or does battle with an impudent Governor who thinks it's his way or the highway.
I'll post the elected members of the NJ Democratic State Committee, reps from all 21 counties, when I get it. Meanwhile, consider this an Open Thread on Shain's letter to John Wisniewski.
Blue Jersey, what do you think? Text of the letter is after the jump.
This is as close to 'required reading' as you're going to see all day, I think - - promoted by Rosi Efthim
He wouldn't own up to it in his Thursday press conference on housing policy. But there it was in the details that, in keeping with Christie tradition, were not even available until a few hours after the announcement. Gov. Christie wants to bring Regional Contribution Agreements (RCAs) - the much-hated payments by wealthy towns to poor cities to take their affordable housing obligations that Speaker Joe Roberts and a diverse range of groups fought for four years to ban - back. In fact, Gov. Christie wants to increase their use to the point that wealthy towns could get out of their entire housing obligation.
In a landmark 2004 speech, then-Majority Leader Roberts called RCAs "repulsive," "exploitative," and "odious." He later began using the term "blood money" to describe how wealthy towns could pay to keep New Jersey racially and economically segregated (we are the most economically segregated, and fifth most racially segregated, state in America). Others compared them to the Civil War practice of wealthy people paying others to stand in for them in the war.
Roberts spent the next four years working with groups like the Housing and Community Development Network and the New Jersey Regional Coalition and leaders like Bishop Joseph Galante of the Camden Diocese to build strong alliances, resulting in a powerful coalition. By 2008, his allies included the building trades, Fair Share Housing Center, NAACP, New Jersey Catholic Conference and many other faith based groups, New Jersey Future, New Jersey Regional Coalition, PlanSmart NJ, Sierra Club and other environmental groups, plus practically all major New Jersey business community groups including the Builders Association, NAIOP, and Building and Industry Association. These groups supported A500, Roberts' historic bill that did away with RCAs and made many other changes to New Jersey's housing policy. David Rusk, a national urban expert who worked closely with the New Jersey Regional Coalition on the bill, called the legislation the most significant state housing policy in the country in several decades.
Gov. Corzine signed A500 in July 2008 in front of 500 people at a historic location: Ethel R. Lawrence Homes, which resulted from the original lawsuit against Mount Laurel Township. Among many other speakers, Doreen Braz, who lives there, talked about the impact on her family from having the opportunity to move to Mount Laurel instead of being forced to stay in one of the communities where RCAs went. Speaker Roberts, in a recent forum at Rider University, named the elimination of RCAs as one of his three biggest legislative accomplishments.
With the ink barely dry on those changes, now Gov. Christie wants to bring RCAs back - and more than that, he wants to make them basically the entirety of the state's housing policy. The Governor at his press conference claimed he was proposing a 10% set-aside for affordable housing in new development, but the fine print allows RCAs as an alternative that developers would make money by choosing. The proposal says that developers can pay a 2.5% fee instead of the 10% set aside, and further states that "[m]unicipalities may use funds in their affordable housing trust funds to underwrite rehabilitation projects in other municipalities which have significant rehabilitation needs but limited resources." In other words, 100% of a municipality's obligation can be moved out of town through an RCA - while in the past only 50% could, and now, thanks to the efforts of Speaker Roberts and many others, none can.
From a financial standpoint, paying the fee is a no-brainer for the builders. Developers will make far more money by paying the fee instead of developing affordable housing on-site. And many of the towns where there is the most job growth and need for more homes will send that money elsewhere, as the long and sorry history of RCAs, banned by the Legislature just two years ago, shows. Indeed, high job growth municipalities like Cranbury, Wayne, and Evesham long used RCAs to keep out the people who work in their towns, people with special needs, and seniors, in the chase for ratables and at the expense of a sensible land use policy. Allowing those municipalities to use RCAs for all of their obligation would make matters even worse.
Governor Christie has demanded action on his plan by June 30, hoping to rush the plan through (for which there is not even a proposed bill at this point). Sen. Lesniak and Sen. Bateman similarly want to bring back RCAs, through a similar "payment in lieu" process in their pending S-1 bill. The question is whether the Democratic leadership will ignore what Speaker Roberts fought so hard for for so many years, with so many behind him, and instead promote a plan that increases our state's racial and economic segregation without producing homes near jobs and transit.
Something for the Blue Jersey community to consider:
1. The marriage equality fight seemed lost when the Assembly Judiciary Committee didn't schedule a vote yesterday.
2. A debate on that committee would have been another 7 hour knock-down drag-out Assembly version of the same scene that played out in the Senate.
3. It's very rare for the Assembly Speaker to exercise the prerogative and post a bill for a full vote without the (largely pro-forma) Assembly Judiciary panel hearing, which is what Speaker Roberts has done in this instance.
4. The Speaker's moved shifted the fulcrum point back to Dick Codey and to the Senate, and (co-incidentally?) a Senate vote was promptly posted.
5. The marriage equality bill is posted for a full vote in both houses! We'll know soon enough who the heros and villains are, right? In the meantime -- and I'll repeat -- we got the bill posted! So the smartest tact at this point is for us activists to focus all our energies at Senators like Shirley Turner and Paul Sarlo or even Jennifer Beck.
I know as well as anyone that passions run incredibly deep but we gotta stay disciplined for the next few days. There's important Senate side-work left to do.
During the historic 7 hours of testimony on marriage equality in December, most if not all of the testimony against reforming our laws on marriage were religious arguments. They said, in essence:
I believe this, so therefore, your rights should be limited, because my belief tradition tells me they should.
News coverage focused on those people (even though plenty clergy in favor showed up), who while they feel strongly, were trying to apply private beliefs to public civic questions, claiming equality would endanger their religious freedom. In fact the reverse is true; clergy who are accepting and ready to perform marriage for same-sex couples cannot do that now. And opponents are only a slice of where New Jersey's faith community is on marriage equality. A letter - with a far broader representation New Jersey's religious leaders - in strong support of marriage equality, and signed by 120 clergy from 19 faiths, was sent today to Senate President Dick Codey and Speaker Joe Roberts. The letter asks that both leaders put the marriage equality bill to a vote before their full respective houses in this legislative session, without precondition.
It's a good letter; tough and direct. It points out that New Jersey's current marriage law is not religiously neutral but reflects the beliefs of leaders of a particular religion opposing marriage equality. And stands behind Republican Senator Bill Baroni's amendment to even further strengthen strong protections for religious freedom - ensuring no religious organization or facility can be sued because it follows its own conscience in which marriages it will accommodate, and which it will not. That America has never let one religious doctrine determine secular law, pointing out - as Asm Reed Gusciora did in his Dec. 7 testimony - that the state provides for divorce even though some traditions find it impermissible, and that New Jersey would never ban civil divorce.
And then it gently asks the state to "get out of our sanctuaries and uphold our religious freedom as clergy to marry whom we wish, or don't wish, under State law."
Full letter's under the fold. Is your family's faith tradition on this list? Or its leaders?
Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts has signaled that the Assembly will not take up marriage equality as lame duck session resumes Monday, unless the Senate does first.
This is not good enough. New Jerseyans on both sides of this issue deserve an up or down vote from every legislator, in both houses, in both parties. Given that the testimony December 7th before the Senate Judiciary Committee made history - with 7 hours of testimony and 1,300 marriage equality advocates taking the day off to show up at the statehouse (against a few handfuls of opponents), it is right and proper now to hear what the people we elected to represent us have to say. And we want it on the record.
I have statements from Roberts, Garden State Equality Chair Steven Goldstein, and Sen. Loretta Weinberg.
Speaker Joe Roberts:
After more than seven hours of testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Dec. 7 and continued public debate in the weeks since, we've certainly had a chance to hear all sides on marriage equality legislation. I believe ample opportunity has already been given for all views to be heard and additional Assembly committee debate is not needed. I've advised the Senate sponsors that, if the bill is passed by the Senate, I am prepared to bring the bill directly to the Assembly floor for a vote before the end of this legislative session.
UPDATE: Sen. Loretta Weinberg statement to Blue Jersey: It is right and appropriate for the full Senate to now vote. Senator Lesniak and I requested Senate President Codey post the Civil Marriage and Freedom of Religion bill for a vote. Let the public know where the majority party in both houses stand on this civil rights issue so important to a strong segment of our supporters.
Garden State Equality Chair Steven Goldstein:
We're far from dead - in the long and winding road in this marriage equality battle, anything and everything has happened. On an issue like marriage equality, which thousands of key players in the Democratic party support so passionately, you predict at your own peril. Remember, earlier this month, we won a major victory in the Senate Judiciary Committee when no one thought the bill would even go to any committee. We call on Senator Codey and Speaker Roberts to bring the bill to a vote before their respective houses, and in the meantime, we will continue to work day and night for victory soon.
We're not taking this announcement from Trenton lying down - not any of us. Garden State Equality is again massing supporters, gay and straight. I'll add my voice as co-Chair of Democracy for America-NJ, and I know my colleagues on the DFA-NJ board back me up - they include Jeff Gardner. Blue Jersey also stands behind Garden State Equality - this is a matter of fairness and equity for all of us.
An ACTION ALERT, called for MONDAY, by GSE:
We're going back to the statehouse. Meet this Monday at 10:00 am in front of Garden State Equality's Trenton office across from the State House - 110 West State Street. We will lobby and rally - keep up the pressure to do the right thing. Massive turnout is key. Please spread the word.
We know from the wild ride that this year has been that this issue is no longer the province only of the gay people whose committed relationships should be recognized in our community. This is about equality. It's that simple. And that matters to us all - it's about what kind of a state we're going to live in. Fair, or unfair. Our legislators have the responsibility to all of us to commit their votes, and we shouldn't accept anything less.
Speaker Roberts unloaded on Asbury Park Press Columnist Bob Ingle with an Editorial published in the paper yesterday. Here's how he began:
For the past two weeks, Gannett New Jersey's Trenton bureau chief, Bob Ingle, has devoted his Sunday column to the kind of rumor-mill nonsense one generally associates with celebrity gossip rags - not some of New Jersey's largest newspapers. His latest doses of nonsense (Sept. 13 and Sept. 20) would have been laughable if there wasn't a chance someone would take them seriously.
Like most people, I generally ignore Ingle's inconsequential diatribes. But his latest assertions are so over-the-top inaccurate that a response is warranted.
Ingle professed to have "word on the street" knowledge of my motivations for stepping down as Assembly speaker. I'm not a journalism scholar, but I'm certain "word on the street" isn't solid sourcing. I'm surprised the editors of the Gannett newspapers would allow such irresponsibility.
To Gannett's credit, at least they printed that shot Roberts took at the paper's editorial staff itself. Follow me below the fold as Roberts continues to lay the smack down on Ingle.
From an email sent out by Chairman Angelini of Gloucester County and Beach of Camden County:
Donald W. Norcross was unanimously nominated today to be the Democratic candidate for the 5th District State Assembly seat being vacated by Speaker Joseph Roberts. Norcross, a longtime labor leader whose work on behalf of working families, charities and civic ventures has earned him the respect of ordinary citizens as well as government and community leaders, was chosen at a special meeting of the Camden and Gloucester Democratic county committees. A resident of Camden, Norcross will be seeking the position left open by Roberts' decision not to run for another term in the November election.
And a comment from the new Assembly candidate:
"I believe we must change the way business is done in Trenton," Norcross told hundreds of Democrats attending the meeting at Brooklawn American Legion Post # 72. "We must put our partisan differences and the special interests aside to do what is best for the ordinary, hard-working taxpayers of this state. The status quo is not working. The state government is wasting too much of our money."
Norcross called for a state-government spending freeze and a moratorium on tax increases. He said that if elected he will push initiatives to create jobs for the growing number of unemployed New Jerseyans, institute tax breaks and other economic incentives for small businesses and stimulate New Jersey's struggling economy."
Norcross will now run with Camden City Council President Angel Fuentes for the seats in November. The changes may not be done in the 5th however, as State Senator Dana Redd is expected to win Mayor of Camden. That would mean that a new Senator would be coming as well and Wally speculated about the implications of that change on a potential contest for Senate President. I'm sure there are varied opinions on this as always. Have at it, but let's try to keep it civil.
With the news last week that Speaker Roberts would not seek another term in office, the jockeying has already begun for who would be in the running to replace him leading the Assembly should the Democrats retain control.
"I've got a job that I'm going to focus on as chairman of the party, working to get Democrats elected," he said. "I'm as accountable as anyone for making sure we retain the Assembly majority, so I'm just going to keep my focus there and see where things go."
"Having had the opportunity to serve the caucus in a leadership position in legislature, I believe ascending to the speaker's position is a natural extension based on the work I've already been doing," Watson Coleman told PolitickerNJ.com in a conference call.
Look for a fourth candidate in the race for Assembly Speaker: Sheila Oliver (D-East Orange) has spent the last two days testing the waters to seek the post. Oliver is the Assistant Essex County Administrator, which means strong ties to County Executive Joseph DiVincenzo and Newark Democratic leader Stephen Adubato. Essex County has the state's largest Assembly delegation - nine votes.
But Oliver could really only be Speaker if Dick Codey were not Senate President, a separate shoe that would still need to drop in the other house. Assemblyman Wisniewski has also expressed his interest, but also reminded people that there were other elections first:
"I am interested in making the case to my colleagues, however there's a little detail called a general election we have to get though first," Wisniewski added. "It's all interesting and noteworthy, but let's win the election then talk about leadership. Is the question, 'Am I interested?' Yes, of course, I am interested."
That's right, let's win the election and we can talk about who leads next. While some say within the party for leadership could distract from the effort to re-election Corzine, Senator Lesniak thinks it could work to his advantage:
"What he can do - and what he better do - is keep out of it, and he's smart enough to do that," said state Sen. Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, a party power broker who holds considerable sway in the leadership disputes. "It could actually work on the governor's behalf, if it's perceived that those who do the best in terms of vote production for Corzine will get him on their side."
That scenario only works if Corzine wins re-election. And that election comes before any other party jockeying. Take the poll and tell us who you think will be the next Speaker of the Assembly and how you think it factors into the Governor's race.
Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts informed legislators and held a press conference to announce that he will not be seeking re-election to the Assembly this November:
Joseph Roberts announces he will not seek re-election
He will serve out the rest of the term as Speaker. There will be plenty of time for commenting on both his replacement for the seat and position as Speaker, but follow me below the fold because there was reaction from all corners.
We'll have to wait for confirmation tomorrow, but we get this big news from NJ.com:
Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts (D-Camden) is planning to announce Wednesday morning that he will not seek re-election this fall, ending a 22-year career in the Legislature, according to two top Democrats familiar with his plans.
Roberts, the most powerful figure in the lower house, plans to break the news to fellow South Jersey Democrats at an 8 a.m. breakfast meeting in Camden County, said the Democratic sources. They requested anonymity when speaking in advance of the announcement.
Sources in the story say that Donald Norcross, co-chair of the Camden County Democrats and President of the Southern New Jersey AFL-CIO will replace him on the ballot. Nearly no story will go without mentioning that he is also the brother of George Norcross. The 5th district is considered more of a safe Democratic district, but along with this move came speculation of further implications on the Senate:
His departure also has implications for the upper house, where a leadership battle is brewing between Senate President Richard Codey (D-Essex) and Senate Majority Leader Steve Sweeney (D-Gloucester). Traditionally, if one leadership position is filled by a North Jersey Democrat, the other is filled by a South Jersey Democrat. Political experts have said that with Roberts leaving, a North Jersey Democrat could ascend to the speakership and boost Sweeney's chances of wresting power from Codey.
But one prominent Democratic legislator said Roberts' motives are straightforward.
"There is a desire for all regions of the state to be represented," said state Sen. Raymond Lesniak (D-Union), who said he had known Roberts was preparing to leave but did not know the announcement would come Wednesday. "But I don't believe that this announcement has anything to do with the senate presidency, I think it has to do with the fact that Joe's had a great career and wants to move on."
There had been prior rumors that Sweeney was considering a challenge to Codey's position as Senate President. Things may not be done here however, because the Senator from the 5th District is Dana Redd, the likely next Mayor of Camden. So we may still see more domino's fall before this story is done. What do you think of the news and what are the wider implications of the Speaker not standing for re-election with the rest of the body up on the ballot? Another big question will be who becomes speaker if you assume that the Democrats maintain control after the election?
"Last month's arrests of legislators, mayors and local officials - and the resignation of a key member of Governor Corzine's cabinet - proved that the Democratic tact of pretending New Jersey is not infested with corruption does not work," said Addiego. "We must act now to purge the Legislature of anyone - regardless of party affiliation - who is accused of breaking the public trust."
But Speaker Roberts was prepared for their grandstanding, having already consulted legal counsel about that possibility as well. First he explained the rules of the Assembly and then said this in his letter responding to Addiego and Rudder:
As you know, prior to any expulsion hearings, Rule 7:6 requires that the committee "serve written charges on the member, provide an opportunity for the member to be heard, to present witnesses, testimony and other evidence, to cross examine witnesses and to be represented by counsel."
Given that our rules would require the formation of a parallel investigation to the ongoing criminal inquiry, I immediately consulted with the State Attorney General and the United States Attorney concerning the expulsion of these members and the due process proceeding required by our rules. They advised that moving forward with the expulsion proceedings could significantly threaten their ongoing criminal investigation of these members and conveyed to me their strong inclination that I not move forward with any proceeding that could in any way hamper their investigation.
I agree that we must send a strong message to the public that corruption will not be tolerated. But, I believe that the actions we take can never jeopardize the ongoing work of law enforcement as they continue to interview witnesses, collect evidence and develop their criminal case against these individuals. That is why I took the unprecedented action of suspending the pay and benefits of these members last week.
I would once again renew my call for Assemblymen Smith and Vas to do the right thing for their constituents and for the good of the Legislature and resign because I believe that they cannot effectively serve the people they were elected to represent given the charges levied against them.
The fact is, Addiego and Rudder could have just sent Roberts the letter, but they decided to try and get some extra attention by putting out a release, which they love to do. So given the response from Roberts, do Addiego and Rudder want to jeopardize the ongoing work of law enforcement in an effort to score more political points? Maybe they can send out a release on that.
The bill requires insurers to cover the cost of autism treatments deemed medically necessary, such as physical, speech and occupational therapy, along with behavioral intervention. The Assembly overwhelmingly passed it Thursday.
That came a week after the Senate approved the measure, which would cap coverage at $36,000 annually for patients ages 21 and younger.
Here's some reaction to the measure, which has been a long fight for many:
"Families that have a loved one with autism should not be expected to shoulder the financial hardships of this disorder alone," said Vincent Prieto, D-Secaucus, who co-sponsored the bill with Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr., D-Brooklawn, and Assemblywoman Joan Voss, D-Fort Lee.
"Requiring health insurers to cover therapies for autistic children early in their lives ensures they receive the treatments they most need when it will make the greatest impact," Prieto said.
[snip]
Treating autism spectrum disorders early ensures that these children learn basic life skills, which can have lifelong impacts, often mitigating some of the challenges faced by many adults with autism," Voss said.
NJ has a higher rate of autism at 1 in 94 than the nationwide average of 1 in 152. Hopefully when the Governor signs it, this legislation will help families get the treatment they need for their loved ones.
Yesterday, the budget vote was postponed as they reworked the package given additional unexpected revenues. Here are some comments from Speaker Roberts, Assemblywoman Watson Coleman and Assemblyman Grewenwald about the success of the tax amnestry program. According to numbers from the state Department of Treasury, the program has collected more than $600 million - $400 million over initial projections - and represents the largest single tax amnesty program executed by any state:The Governor's office and Legislative leaders can now tout the success of the program, which is a nice change from the news they have been dealing with lately. What do you think they should do with the money? The Governor and Legislative leaders have indicated it will go toward property tax relief. Others have questioned why it will not be used to pay down the debt or restore funding for other program cuts. We'll know when the budget committees go through the process again on Monday and then Leaders hope to pass the budget next Thursday now.
Although they started returning on Memorial day, a parade and ceremonies were held in Trenton yesterday to honor the service of our National Guard troops. The largest deployment since World War II returned with the same number they left to serve. Here is video from the Assembly:And here is some video from the Governor's office where he said:
"Today, we are proud to welcome home our heroes one and all," Governor Corzine said. "You have served our state and our nation with dignity, with honor, and with courage. We can only imagine the adversity you faced and the conditions that made your jobs even more difficult. On behalf of all New Jersey's citizens, we thank you for your patriotism and service and we honor the sacrifices of your families. We are fortunate that you have all returned home safely."
I'll put more comments from elected officials, video and photos from the day below the fold. We're glad to have them all back safe and sound, but just because they've returned safely doesn't mean that everything goes back to normal. Let's hope that our elected officials are as interested in caring for them now that they have returned as they were celebrating their arrival.
Time will tell if this is wishful thinking, but Legislative leaders are hopeful that the Budget will be done early this year:
Sen. President Richard Codey and Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr. said they hoped to get the budget passed on June 18.
The new fiscal year begins on July 1, so that would be the deadline before they'd have to stop the clock and extend time. Here's what Speaker Roberts had to say about what we will see:
Roberts says the proposed budget provides for basic services "but not much more."
In an election year with not much good news, the budget has the potential to cause nothing but headaches and bad headlines. They may just want to get this one behind them.
Here's a pretty good video release from the Assembly Democrats with highlights of the testimony and comments discussing autism legislation that advance from committee on Monday:
The measure (A-2238) follows the 2007 enactment of seven laws that made New Jersey a national leader in providing support to families with autistic members. It would require health insurers to cover the expenses of treatments deemed medically necessary for autism-spectrum disorders, which include Childhood Disintegrative Disorder, Asperger's Disorder and Rhett's Syndrome. Insurance coverage would be extended to physical, speech and occupational therapies, as well as behavioral interventions.
Joining the elected officials at the hearing was Bob Wright, co-founder of autism speaksThe statistics are staggering and the costs are even greater. The bill heads to the Assembly now for a full vote. New Jersey would be the 11th state in the nation to provide mandatory treatment for autistic individuals, with respect to behavioral intervention, occupational, speech and physical therapy if the bill became a law.
New Jersey Gov. Jon S. Corzine has been given the authority to force state workers to take unpaid furloughs.
The state's Civil Service Commission adopted an emergency rule Wednesday giving state and local governments the authority to order temporary layoffs.
The commission says worsening fiscal conditions made the action necessary.
The Governor wants public employees to give up their pay raise and take one furlough day per month beginning in July. He has said if he didn't furlough, the next option would be layoffs. It appears the hearing didn't go without public opposition as the unions denounced the plan:
Some 500 union members chanting "No furloughs" gathered outside the meeting in Trenton to protest, said Hetty Rosenstein, state director for the Communication Workers of America.
"It's historic in its outrageousness," she said. "Our worst union busters haven't tried to do this."
Rosenstein said the union was given less than two days' notice about the meeting.
Two union members attempted to speak at the meeting -- identified by Rosenstein as Ken McNamara, president of Local 1037, and Patrick Kavanagh, president of Local 1032 -- and were arrested by state police. Two more unidentified people were also arrested.
Reaction from Legislative Leaders focused on furloughs being the best of bad choices available. Said Speaker Roberts:
"The global recession has brought no easy answers, but furloughs are a better option than laying off thousands of workers. Gov. Corzine has made the right choice to keep people employed and give governments the flexibility to save money.
"Keeping people working, insured and providing for their families is always preferable to putting people onto unemployment lines. When times are tough everyone must work together to tighten our belts, and public workers surely understand that."
"We don't have to look any further to our neighbors in New York, where Governor Paterson has already initiated plans to eliminate the jobs of 9,000 state employees. While job furloughs and wage freezes are painful, we all have to accept that sacrifices will have to be made by all public employee in New Jersey, and that the other choices for closing our budget shortfall would be far worse."
I asked a few months back if this was the best of bad options. From the way the debate shaped up, it always appeared that public employees would have been asked to give back, the question was how much. I don't want to see anyone lose their pay or their hours, but I want to see them on the unemployment line even less.
Speaker Roberts and Majority Leader Watson Coleman held a Tele-town hall meeting with members of NJ AARP:
During the hour-long question and answer session, the legislative leaders discussed, among other things, Assembly efforts to combat the global economic crisis, including increasing income limits for the Senior Freeze property tax relief program, boosting funding to help households pay utility bills and combating home foreclosures.
The video release they put out is below. The use of technology to encourage more participation from the membership around the state is good to see.
Reflecting the economic realities and challenges facing our leaders in Trenton as the attempt to craft the budget, Speaker Roberts offered this comment:
"This may be the most dire budget situation that I have seen in all my years in the Legislature," Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts Jr. (D., Camden) said after a late morning meeting with Gov. Corzine and other legislative leaders. "There are bad choices and there are worse choices."
It looks like the question will not be if people are going to be effected by the budget cuts, but by how much they are going to feel the pain. And there is still no sign that things are turning around, meaning revenues will most likely continue to fall. Meanwhile, in an election year, Republicans will continue to take pot shots at every turn. It's all going to make for a very difficult climate to have these Legislators and the Governor face the voters in November.
