4 users logged on

Tips: BlueJerseyDotCom (AIM) |

A budget deal is reached

by: Jason Springer

Mon Jun 21, 2010 at 10:24:12 PM EDT

We get news tonight that a deal has been reached between the Governor and Legislative Leaders on a $29.4 billion budget:

The budget deal makes about $180.7 million in changes to Christie's budget proposal while keeping in place most of the biggest cuts, such as $848 million from property tax rebates and an $820 million reduction in aid to school districts.

The deal apparently does not include restoration of $7.5 million in cuts from Christie that would support 58 family planning clinics. Supposedly, there will be separate legislation forthcoming for that, but Senator Weinberg informs us that the Governor plans to veto that supplemental appropriation. Here's a summary of some of the restorations that Democrats were able to get:

•Blue laws - $64,000,000
•Urban Enterprise Zones - $48,000,000
•General assistance - $21,995,000
•Supplemental security income, Personal needs allowance for community-based developmental disabilities clients - $10,282,000
•Personal assistance home care - $9,669,000
•Garrett W. Hagedorn Gero-Psychiatric Hospital - $6,370,000
•New Jersey cultural trust - includes Trenton Barracks museum, Battleship N.J. and Newark Museum - $4,000,000
•State Commission of Investigation - $3,539,000
•NJ After 3 - $3,000,000
•Sheltered workshops for people with disabilities - $3,000,000
•Adult medical day care - $2,379,000
•Center for Hispanic Policy - $1,400,000
•Educational Opportunity Fund - $1,300,000
•NJ STARS Scholarships for tuition - $1,000,000
•Respite care - $800,000
•Education services for blind children - $20,000

It's good to see the funding for the SCI restored, lets just hope the Governor doesn't line item veto it. They are still going to need 4 Democrats in the Senate and 8 in the Assembly to pass this budget, so while a deal has been reached, we will see where the votes come from.

Jason Springer :: A budget deal is reached

Tags: SCI, Chris Christie, budget, family planning services, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

A budget deal is reached | 9 comments

Why don't they fund SCI first? (0.00 / 0)

That way, they can wait to see if Christie will veto it before passing the rest of the budget.

Same thing with the women's health clinics. This last cut is really an attack on women. The Democrats should play hard ball on this one.

by: princetonblue @ Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 02:38:56 AM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

You guys... (0.00 / 0)

...really make me laugh with your rhetoric. Do you realize you don't speak for all women?

by: RightOne @ Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 03:16:51 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Umm? (0.00 / 0)

I don't understand the point you are making here. The family planning centers play an important role in helping women, particularly those economically or socially challenged, in times of need. Studies have shown that are a great tool in the fight against poverty and are very helpful for women to be in charge of their own lives.

What women are you speaking about who oppose it? The only surveys I have seen would suggest right-wing women are against it, but that's it.

by: princetonblue @ Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 14:05:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

By Constitutional direction (0.00 / 0)

all spending items have to been in one unified bill.

by: Thurman Hart @ Tue Jun 22, 2010 at 23:43:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Constitution and the Budget (0.00 / 0)

If all budget items have to be in one bill, why are some people suggesting a supplemental funding bill for the family planning centers?

by: princetonblue @ Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 14:06:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I have no idea (0.00 / 0)

But Section II is pretty clear:

All moneys for the support of the State government and for all other State purposes as far as can be ascertained or reasonably foreseen, shall be provided for in one general appropriation law covering one and the same fiscal year...

I'd say such a supplemental bill would be shot down as unconstitutional.

by: Thurman Hart @ Wed Jun 23, 2010 at 21:25:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]