2700 pages

by: jdoshna

Sun Mar 14, 2010 at 09:48:04 AM EDT

That said, what is emerging right now -- an adoption of the Senate bill by the House with agreement on how to fix it -- is what it's going to take to get HCR done in the current political environment.

This is not something trivial, not insignificant, and very complicated.  We're talking about 1/6th of our economy here, not a resolution to create a postage stamp

So I'm amazed at all those who continue to harp on the point that this bill is 2700 pages long.  As if the length of the legislation is related to it's merits.  It's too long, too much government, too much legislation -- so it must be bad.

Since when did we measure the worth something by the page count?

Lawless Newark Police Violate Transgender Woman's Rights

by: Deborah Jacobs, ACLU-NJ Executive Director

Fri Feb 19, 2010 at 08:23:04 PM EST

Diana Taylor was walking home from a computer repair shop when two police officers abruptly stopped her on the street. Without any reason, they demanded she identify herself. Taylor provided her given name - Christopher Moore.

"You're right; I owe you 10 dollars," one officer told the other, "It is a man."

She was stopped, Taylor realized, to settle a dehumanizing bet about her gender.

As onlookers gathered, the officers went on to call Taylor derogatory names and make crude inquiries about her sex life. Then, without justification, they roughly cuffed and arrested her, taunting her the entire time. Once at the precinct, they scrambled to find something wrong on her record (it was clean) and then demanded she accept a ride home. During the two-block trip, the officers threatened to sic gang members in her neighborhood on her if she filed an internal affairs complaint.

Their threats couldn't stop Taylor. Still, it took countless calls to internal affairs before someone finally took down her complaint, and they still didn't take her seriously. The department then issued her summonses "after the fact" on false charges of littering and disorderly conduct.

This lawsuit on Taylor's behalf is the ACLU-NJ's third in as many years alleging misconduct by Newark police. We hope this case will finally penetrate the department's culture of impunity, and in particular, we hope Newark Mayor Cory Booker takes notice.  

Party Democracy Act signed

by: Hopeful

Fri Oct 02, 2009 at 06:45:49 PM EDT

Governor Jon S. Corzine today signed legislation that makes certain changes to current laws governing the activities of county political party committees. The bill, S-930/ A-1904, requires these committees to adopt constitutions and bylaws, calls for specific information concerning committee members to be filed with the county clerk and eliminates fixed terms for committee members and chairs.

"This legislation is another step forward in our efforts to bring more transparency and ethics to government," said Governor Corzine. "I thank Senator Weinberg for her commitment and advocacy on this important issue."

As a result of the legislation, constitutions and bylaws of each county committee are required to be posted on the organization's respective website and copies of the documents must be provided to the county board of elections for website display.   In addition, anyone elected or appointed to membership on the county committee is entitled to receive a copy of the constitution or bylaws and that request must be filled within 48 hours of receipt.  

"This law is a reform of the party structure here in New Jersey," said Senator Loretta Weinberg, (D-Bergen), who is a long-time advocate of open government. "As the prime sponsor of this bill, we designed it to ensure that there is an even playing field within party organizations with openness and due process. I want to congratulate Governor Corzine on signing such an important piece of legislation - one that now brings our state one step closer to full accountability on all levels of government."

Under the bill, municipal clerks would be required to file an official list of committee members with the county clerk within 20 days after a committee's first meeting following the primary election. This list would be considered a government document available to the public upon request.

You all know the reason for the other clause:

In addition, procedures for removing committee officers who are unwilling or unable to serve, is required to be included in the organization's constitutions and bylaws. A member's resignation must be accompanied by a notarized letter of resignation signed by that committee member, or, if the resigning committee member fails to provide such a letter, by a notarized letter stating that the resignation has occurred.  The chair of a county committee would have a continuing duty to report changes in the committee membership, with appropriate documentation, to the county clerk.

Although it reads in the release like a minor thing, I believe the PDA is an important reform and significant step forward for progressives.

Adler Sells Out His District - By The Numbers

by: Somewhere In The Swamps

Thu Aug 27, 2009 at 05:17:03 PM EDT

Throughout the recent health care debate, New Jersey's Democratic delegation has stood firmly on the side of progressive reform, committed to varying degrees to the public option.  Representatives Pascrell, Holt, Payne and Sires - four men from very different parts of the Democratic coalition - have all signed on to the FireDogLake pledge, promising to vote against any bill that does not include a public option health plan which is "available nationwide, on day one, and accountable to Congress and the voters."  Representative Rothman has clearly stated that the public option is the key to reform, in order to "to keep insurance companies honest." And Representatives Andrews and Pallone are co-sponsors of House bill 3200, which would write exactly such a public option into law, and as sub-committee chairmen, vital players in the reform debate.

This leaves only one Democratic Congressman unaccounted for.  John Adler.  And Adler isn't just quiet on the public option, or unwilling to take a specific pledge.  He's come out as one of its leading Democratic opponents.

"The bill that's coming through the House, with or without the public option, isn't good for America," Adler said matter-of-factly. "We have Congressional Budget Office projections of a trillion-dollar increase in costs that will have to be borne by taxpayers or insurance purchasers; meaning businesses and households. Either way, that's a cost we can't afford."

An interesting analysis was released recently by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce for each and every Congressional district in the United States that clearly spells out the benefits of the aforementioned House bill 3200, aka America's Affordable Health Choices Act.  So in case you're wondering what John Adler's opposition to progressive health care reform is costing his constituents, this will give you an idea.  Without this bill, in the third Congressional district alone...

• 14,600 small businesses will not get tax credits for 50% of their health insurance costs
• 12,000 seniors will remain stuck in the Medicare Part D "donut hole"
• 1,330 families will go bankrupt due to health care costs (2008 figure)
• $56,000,000 in unpaid medical bills will pile up for doctors and hospitals (2008 figure)
• 47,000 people will remain uninsured

This is the bill that John Adler tells us "isn't good for America."  It's time for the people of the third Congressional district to tell John Adler that what isn't good for America is his work on behalf of his paymasters in the insurance, health, and pharmaceutical industries to derail real reform that millions of Americans are relying on, including tens of thousands who elected him to office last November.

Frank Pallone Health Care Town Hall - Piscataway

by: Rosi Efthim

Tue Aug 25, 2009 at 01:42:53 PM EDT

So many, that Pallone ran 3 full sessions, emptying out each time for a new crop of people. Each session, its own rhythm. The first had the most organized agitators from the teabag movement. Their antagonizing started outside, even before the doors were opened. Section 2, the most substantive questions - on both sides - and people willing to listen to the answers. The weary third session - most people waiting hours hours to get in - the largest, and the most concerned with preventive care, and with the side issue of abortion.

It was also the only session with many young people.

I was glad to see them show up. Particularly given this, noting that young Obama supprters are AWOL from the health care fight. And that's messed up. This is signature legislation from the Obama era and change still needs the life, drive and energy of young progressives.

Most of the people walked into the room with opinions gelled, looking for that microphone. Pallone, even-tempered even when the room got shouty, sometimes veered into the wonky.

Substantive questions were on mental health parity, fraud prevention, impact of public option on the deficit, and impact on the disabled. But those were high points.

Cuckoo. Liars. Nazis. Socialists. "He hasn't even read the bill!" You heard this, too. People angry, mistrustful of government, certain they're getting bamboozled. A stunning number expressing complete indifference to people without care.

Here's what surprised me:

I expected misperceptions, even deliberate misdirection. Got that. I wasn't prepared for so many of the anti-reform agitators fully believing that what HR 3200is, is single-payer health care.  

Make the distinction more effecitvely between the public option and single-payer. Dial down the anger (both sides, I hope).Get me some young blood. And then, maybe we got ourselves a ballgame.

Pallone has another Town Hall TONIGHT 7pm, Red Bank Middle School, 101 Harding Road, Red Bank, 07701. Rush Holt's is Wed 7pm: Middletown Arts Center, 36 Church St., Middletown 07748. John Adler's Wed 4pm: Energy Expo, Burlington County Inst. of Technology, Westampton Campus, 695 Woodlane Road, Westampton, 08060. And Adler needs your help on a course correction.  

Certified Political Reformer?

by: RynMelberg

Tue Aug 18, 2009 at 07:45:33 PM EDT

One of my quotes from an interview during the 2009 Hoboken mayoral election that I continue to get questions about is that I refused the label and suggested that there were no real reformers running even though several people were using that label. The questioners point out that I have a very long reformer resume and could legitimately claim the label. I replied that in terms of politics I don't always know what someone means when they call themselves a reformer. So instead of more labeling, I suggest we explore "political reformer" and start with a few questions:

1) What is a political reformer

2) What isn’t a political reformer

3) How can one tell the difference?

The most obvious and laziest definition of reformer is one that advocates for reform. Another is "one who, when he smells a rat, is eager to let the cat out of the bag". When we think of "reformers" in terms of politics we think of someone who works to "abolish abuse or malpractice", "correct evil, abuse, or error", and/or "to give up harmful or immoral practices; persuade to adopt a better way of life". Core in all these definitions is that a reformer is part of a cause that is focused on changing behavior, modifying conduct, and establishing a standard of acceptable practices that are evenly applied to all. As a politician a reformer it is about a consistency between words and deeds, new ideas and fair practices.

The flip side is that a reformer is not about maintaining the status quo or say they have to “fight fire with fire” as a justification for engaging in the same behavior as the corruption they are running against. A reformer knows that real change is about behavior and so does not engage in the cult of personality. They know and their actions reflect that changing the players without changing how the game is played is meaningless.

Telling the difference between a real reformer and someone who calls themselves that to get votes is difficult. So here is a list of questions to ask to help. Think of them as the political reformer version of the certified public accountant exam or a certified political reformer exam.  The extra credit questions are the more extreme of the category.

Politics as Usual (Hypocrisy)

1) Has the politician been accused of doing something illegal, unethical or immoral and their response to point fingers, i.e., something along the lines of “well, so-and-so did it”?

2) Has the politician labeled an opponent as corrupt and then engaged in the same or similar behavior themselves?

3) Have they ever justified their own behavior by split hairs between what is legal and what is ethical?

4) When they make a mistake excuses instead of apologizing?

5) When asked about an appointment or hiring on their campaign or office do they make some reference to you “not understanding” or “its politics”?

6) Do they avoid discussions of specific process or behavior changes they will make to reform the system?

7) Extra credit question: if they are in office, do they refer to their campaign for reelection or higher offer as “grassroots”?

Cult of Personality (Bully and Blame):

8) When they give specifics of what reform they are fighting for is it about a person or group of people?

9) When faced with a financial or other difficult policy issue did they blame it on the poor or make scapegoats of a nebulous group (i.e., seniors, unions, “the machine”, Wall Street, government, etc.)?

10) When the politician was questioned about illegal, unethical or immoral behavior did they attack, vilify or name-call the person who asked, claimed the questioner is attacking them or some other defensive technique?

11) Have they or their supporters used the internet or any other media to make personal attacks on anyone?

12) Extra credit question: when questioned about their behavior from within the movement, have they or their campaign ever called out the questioner for not being a “real reformer” or for “attacking reformers”?

If when assessing a politician with the above questions and you answered “yes” to five or more, they are a RINO (reformer in name only). Sorry. But don’t get mad at them. There is a rule of thumb that the life expectancy of reformer politician nationally is 5 years. That's a national average so you can bet that some places it is as low as 6 months or even 6 days. The primary reason sited for how a reformer "turns bad" is fear, fear of losing. The fear of losing is stronger than the desire for change or their commitment to the cause. Some proffered getting distracted from the mission, which is the number one cause for failure amongst non-profits. But a review of interviews with fallen reformers have them saying things like "well, you have to get elected", "it was political", "it is how things get done", etc. We've all heard it from Marion Barry to Rod Blagojevich and we’ll certainly hear it again and again if we refuse to learn from our mistakes.

How do good intentions get so easily supplanted by a need to win? It is because the politically active (contributors, operatives and volunteers) "have a one strike and you are out" perspective. This creates desperation in reformer candidates to win or they won't have a chance to make the changes they so sincerely desire. Then people start whispering in their ears about how they can't win if they don't do this or that, and how it can't be that bad because look what so-and-so is doing. The temptation becomes too strong for most and they start taking short-cuts, trimming corners and bending the rules; winning by any means necessary.

Real reform starts with the politically active. We need to say it is better to lose than to win at any cost - and mean it. If we really want reform and to elect reformers, then we need to support and vote for the behavior we want to represent us. We need to not be distracted by pretty faces and prettier platitudes. We need to remember that two wrongs don't make a right. We need to have a zero tolerance policy on hypocrisy and bullying. We need to stop participating in the cult of personality and become devotees of the competent.

A nun once told me that living the precepts of Christ - turn the other cheek, love they neighbor, etc. - is the hardest job in the world. Being a political reformer may be a close second.

Steps to Reforming the Camden County Democrats

by: Martin

Tue Aug 11, 2009 at 02:58:54 PM EDT

What Needs to Happen to Truly Kill Corruption

by: njnewsgrrl

Fri Jul 31, 2009 at 11:37:07 AM EDT

While explaining the atmosphere in the Garden State following the indictment of 44 individuals on corruption charges, an NPR reporter appearing on PBS's "The News Hour" last week compared the situation to the launch of the space shuttle. When it first began, everyone was interested, everyone was talking about it, and it was a big deal, she said. But now, we're so used to it that we just shrug our shoulders and go about our business.

Sad, but true.

We've been dealt this deck of cards. And it's pretty embarrassing, not to mention harmful to our state and communities. So what can we do to change the situation? How can we make it better?

First, we have to accept the fact that there are too many people who profit - financially or otherwise - from the current system. These people run the system, whether they be elected officials, political operatives or lobbyists. And they have zero motivation to affect the kind of substantial, systemic change that our state really needs. Sure, they will talk about reforms in the law enacted in the past few years. But clearly, the little that has changed is not enough.

Second, we will have to accept that as long as politicians need money to get elected, there will be corruption in the system. A functioning system of publicly financed elections is crucial to reducing the influence of money in politics. There have been noble efforts to institute such a system, but it's been very, very slow in development. Wonder why? See the previous paragraph.

What we really need is a complete overhaul of state law to reduce the influence of, for lack of a better term, skuzzy politicians, in our government. In an ideal world, that overhaul would do the following:

Christie wants to run a "pay-for-play" campaign

by: Hopeful

Mon May 11, 2009 at 12:08:31 PM EDT

McGreevey's executive order banned the state from awarding contracts of more than $17,500 to companies in which high-ranking officials contributed more than $300 to a gubernatorial candidate or state or county party organization... McGreevey's order covered contributors who controlled 10 percent or more of companies getting state contracts. Corzine included any partner, officer, or principal of a vendor firm, further limiting the number of people who would be willing to contribute to gubernatorial campaigns.

...And that has Republican gubernatorial candidate Christopher J. Christie in a lather.

"This governor is a hypocrite. He signs this executive order which he doesn't live by, yet he forces everybody else in the race to live by it," he said.

Let's get this straight:

Will Frank LoBiondo block defense contracting reform again?

by: Hopeful

Wed Mar 04, 2009 at 04:40:07 PM EST

Recently that public trust has not always been kept.  Over the last eight years, government spending on contracts has doubled to over half a trillion dollars.  Far too often, the spending is plagued by massive cost overruns, outright fraud, and the absence of oversight and accountability.  In some cases, contracts are awarded without competition.  In others, contractors actually oversee other contractors.  We are spending money on things that we don't need, and we're paying more than we need to pay.  And that's completely unacceptable.

Last year, the Government Accountability Office, GAO, looked into 95 major defense projects and found cost overruns that totaled $295 billion.  Let me repeat:  That's $295 billion in wasteful spending.  And this wasteful spending has many sources.  It comes from investments and unproven technologies.  It comes from a lack of oversight.  It comes from influence peddling and indefensible no-bid contracts that have cost American taxpayers billions of dollars.

"Contractors actually oversee other contractors" is a major part of what wrong in Deepwater. Obama's new presidential memorandum should help, but Congress also needs to act:

Michael Kasparian Releases Party Reform Platform

by: Bill W

Sat Jan 17, 2009 at 12:09:16 PM EST

Bergen County Democratic Committee members should be receiving a correspondence from Mike Kasparian outlining his platform for party reform should he be elected BCDO Chair. Skipping to the meat of the matter, here are the six points he lists :  (retyped by me, so I'll take credit for any typos)

1. Mandatory ethics training: Our reform package must start with Ethics Reform. All BCDO Officers, members of the Executive Committee, staffers and candidates must receive mandatory ethics training similar to that which Governor Corzine mandated for all State Commission and Advisory Board members.

2. Internet Accessibility of BCDO Information: Posting on the Internet of all County Committee members names, along with all BCDO by-laws, governing documents and notices.

3. Independent Audit: We must conduct an independent third party audit of BCDO finances and make that information available to all members.

4. Open and Fair Conventions: All special conventions will be admnistered by an impartial third party, such as a retired member of the judiciary.

5. Charitable Outreach: BCDO should establish a fund in support of outreach organizations, such as Meals on Wheels, YMCA/YWCA and the Red Cross as examples.

6. A Committee Process: In accordance with our by-laws we must conduct regularly scheduled sub-committee meetings and seek the input of the full County Committee on all issues including fundraising, candidate selection, and policy issues.

Now, you can count me as skeptical of a candidate who seems to be drawing the support of all the wrong people, and lacking the support of many of the right people, but if he did manage to implement these six ideas, and if they were carried out conscientiously and fairly, I think it would be a good step in the right direction. I know, though, that's a couple of big "ifs".

One I find somewhat puzzling is the "Charitable Outreach" business -- it doesn't seem to me something that a party organization would typically involve itself in. Do other County Committees do this?

Any other thoughts on these proposals?

What Do We Do On November 5th???

by: Nick Lento

Thu Oct 09, 2008 at 10:27:27 AM EDT

Absolutely RIGHT!  There's STILL time for ALL of New Jersey's Democrats with safe seats and deep pockets to get off their butts and open their wallets in support of the WHOLE ticket!

(This started out as a comment in Thurman's excellent diary The Senate Race that Wasn't http://www.bluejersey.net/show...  but it went a bit far afield from his immediate subject......)

..........I wish Lautenberg and Stender had used their financial advantages and momentum to call upon ALL of the NJ congressional delegation to make it a CRUSADE to put win in ALL the contested seats.

Frank and Linda will likely win; but they could have been far more aggressive and won for the whole state instead of just focusing on their own elections.

The same applies to all the congressional incumbents like Rothman and Pallone et al who have safe seats.  Why aren't they all all over the state stumping for every challenger???   Makes no sense to me.   Is that considered "rude"?   Is there an unwritten law against congresspeople supporting challengers to sitting members???

We could have had a statewide reform movement that would have garnered another half a million new voters to vote for Barack and to create a downticket landslide that just might have swept folks like Tom Wyka and certainly Dennis Shulman into office.   As it is they are still fighting long odds

I really do wonder about the intelligence, competence and motivations of the NJ Democratic party.

Do they REALLY want to win big and REALLY clean up/transform our state?   Or is it just about maintaining a corrupt status quo that puts more money into the hands of the same individuals and corporations that have been raping us forever?

Yeah sure, I'll vote Democratic across the line.....but only because the Republicans would be even worse for New Jersey.....but is that really the best we can do???

It's time the people of New Jersey, MOST of whom will back a progressive reform agenda that provides fundamental root to branch change, literally TAKE OVER the state Democratic party from the morally/ethically corrupt hacks who are now in control.

Nothing less will do the job.

The people, institutions and corporations who have been living "high on the hog" off of the hard work and sweat pf NJ taxpayers have to be thrown out of office and thrown into jail (where possible).   There is no more "fat of the land" for them to live off of.

Christie's Probe of Katz May Cause Him More Harm than Good

by: mikeshapiro

Wed Jul 23, 2008 at 09:36:50 AM EDT

A Victory for "Pay to Play" Reformers

by: mikeshapiro

Tue Jul 08, 2008 at 11:16:42 PM EDT

Time for a poker rule

by: Hopeful

Wed Jun 04, 2008 at 12:54:03 PM EDT

I suggest that this is the time to reform the law. In New Mexico, a tied election is settled by a game of chance.  It sure beats counting on one of the candidates to withdraw.

Why Joe Vas Lost

by: Thurman Hart

Thu May 15, 2008 at 10:25:12 PM EDT

When I first heard of Joe Vas, he was running for the seat just vacated by now-Senator Bob Menendez.  A lot of my friends who were so involved in battling the myriad mini-machines of Hudson County flocked to his side - convinced that his sweet words were sincere and that he would break the back of the Hudson County machine.

Like most fairy tales, this one didn't translate into reality so well.  Machines are machines because they are not easily broken.  And the fairy god-father, in this case, had more than just feet made of clay.

Mayor Booker visited my classroom this week.

by: Dvd Avins

Wed May 07, 2008 at 06:02:30 PM EDT

Who goes to Pathways Academy? Well, first, it's in Newark, so the kids are those growing up in the extraordinarily unsafe environment that is Newark today. Many Newark students who have involved parents go to schools that are not part of Newark Public Schools (NPS)—either private or charter schools. Of those who go to NPS high schools, many are siphoned away from the general population into magnet schools. Many of the magnet school teachers will tell you that there's no difference between the lack of ambition and poor mental health of their students and those in the general high schools, but again, the students who go to the magnet schools disproportionately have parents who are engaged with their children's education.

Why Commend Inclan?

by: mikeshapiro

Tue May 06, 2008 at 11:06:00 AM EDT

Why Mrs. Andrews?

by: mikeshapiro

Tue Apr 15, 2008 at 08:29:44 PM EDT

Lieutenant Governor: No Longer a Patronage Job

by: mikeshapiro

Tue Mar 18, 2008 at 10:20:25 PM EDT