1 user logged on

Tips: BlueJerseyDotCom (AIM) |

GOP opportunism knocks

by: Hank Kalet

Tue Dec 26, 2006 at 04:56:54 PM EST

( - promoted by jmelli)

Cross posted from Channel Surfing:

Why is that Republicans never concern themselves with political reform when they are the majority party?

Consider the record: The party ran in 1991, in the wake of the unpopular Jim Florio tax hike, on a platform that included recall of elected officials and initiative and referendum. They controlled the Legislature for 10 years, the governor's mansion for eight, and we still have no I&R.

And then, after the McGreevey administration came to power, the GOP started pushing for pay-to-play reforms -- something that was off the table when the Whitman administration was botching E-ZPass and lottery contracts.

I raise this question after reading an Associated Press report saying that a pair of Morris County Republicans want to create a limited version of I&R for spending measures.

Hank Kalet :: GOP opportunism knocks

The Assembly members, Richard Merkt and Joseph Pennacchio, say their plan would allow citizens to have a direct say in how public money is spent.

"This proposal would give New Jersey citizens direct control over state tax, spending and borrowing decisions," Merkt said. "Trenton has failed the taxpayers of New Jersey and it is time that we put decision-making power back in the hands of the people."

The plan, according to the AP report, would allow citizens to:

post questions on the ballot if they get signatures from 25 percent of registered voters in 14 of the state's 21 counties. If passed by voters, a proposal would become law within 60 days. It could be stopped only if two-thirds of both houses of the Legislature voted to overturn the voter approval.

Put another way, petitioners could bypass some of the state's largest and densest counties (Bergen, Camden, Essex, Hudson, Middlesex and Passaic -- about half the state's population) and still get something on the ballot. That's absurd.

That doesn't mean we should dismiss I&R out of hand. On the contrary, I&R theoretically enhances our democracy -- provided there are tight controls on money spent during I&R campaigns.

But we have to ask hard questions not only about the plan being floated by Merkt and Pennachio but about the motivations behind it. The Assembly members say they are making their proposal -- destined to die in committee -- because of the summer's budget fiasco and sales tax hike and the recent approval of money for stem cell research and needle exchange programs, but I have to wonder.

After all, we are entering an election year in which the entire Legislature is up for election, a Legislature that is not exactly popular in public opinion polls. Simply put, the proposal smacks of the kind of political opportunism that gave us the GOP majority in the early 1990s, a majority that slashed the state income tax without thought to future budgets, while burying its own reform platform in the back of its storage closet.

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

Tags: I&R, GOP hypocrisy, (All Tags)

Print Friendly View

Send As Email

GOP opportunism knocks | 8 comments

pre-emptive strike (0.00 / 0)

it was something that Dana Wefer was going to talk about and they wanted to take it before she could get out there with it.

by: doughnutman @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 05:20:16 AM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I&R is good. (0.00 / 0)

You really aren't bypassing anybody, for anything to be approved everyone votes and majority rules. I don't think your concern about a minority of counties forcing their will on the majority will materialize.
I agree that republicans had 10 years to fix pay to play, ethics, and host of other problems that have come to a head recently, but in the end I just want those issues addressed and I'm not particularly concerned which party addresses them.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 12:13:15 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Yes and no (0.00 / 0)

I can agree that all of that needs to be fixed and, to be honest, I'm not all that optimistic that the Democrats will get much done (witness the tax reform debacle).

But I&R as proposed by the two GOP Assembly member leaves open the possibility of a California-style approach open to abuse by money interests. Consider a petition approved in 14 counties -- the smallest 14, less than half the population meaning that just one out of eight rather than one in four as seemingly proposed. Let's assume it is a proposal defining marriage as only between a man and a woman. It gets on the ballot during an Assembly-only year when we are likely to have just 40 percent of the voters voting. Money interests line up behind the measure and it wins approval with just 50.1 percent of the vote.

Not exactly what I&R is intended to do.

Better to require a smaller percentage of registered voters and eliminate the county requirement and put tight controls in place on I&R spending (provided they are constitutional).

Basically, not all I&R plans are the same.

by: Hank Kalet @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 14:07:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I'm not very familiar.... (0.00 / 0)

with California history of I&R. But I do know that they seem to have some pretty couragous laws on the books because of I&R.
Has it been the case where big money has corrupted the process there?

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 15:05:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

California... (0.00 / 0)

has had a mixed experience, with good and bad laws being crafted through the process. In recent years, though, big money has allowed the process to be manipulated -- draconian budget rules pushed by monied conservatives, the affirmative action ban, etc. This has some progressives criticizing I&R.

by: Hank Kalet @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 16:18:59 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I&R is a double edged sword (0.00 / 0)

My experience was in Washington State (don't know how similar the system there is to California).

Initiatives were passed, but in some cases were so poorly written the State courts struck them down as unconstitutional. One set all auto taxes at $30 regardless of make and value of the car, but the same initiative had other provisions that made it invalid (there you can not have "double-barreled " referenda).

Anyway, the $30 fee remained as public opinion was so in favor (to my recollection, the legislature enacted the $30 across the board fee).

Further, Tim Eynman, a major force behind many of the initiatives, was eventually found to be pocketing money raised associated with the process and was discredited.

So I would say I like the concept of initiatives, but as always, buyer beware. And I agree this particular stunt by the GOP is just that-- as with so many other things in this state, just window dressing, particular with the Repubs.

by: westcoast @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 18:44:46 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

I worry about... (0.00 / 0)

the same thing corrupting the constituional convention. I'm afraid that a convention will be the conclusion of the property tax reform process. (I just can't believe that the legislature will stick its neck out to get meaningful reforms done). I was particularly amazed by what they had proposed before the gov. put the kybosh on the process. I have little faith they will achieve the same momentum again. That's why I thought I&R was a good idea, it seemed a way to get things done without someone worrying about reelection.
But I can see that no matter what, any process can be corrupted, I'm waiting for the NJ constitution convention to have 'elected delegates' and find out the only delegates with the $$$ to get elected will be pawns of the special interests.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 19:58:37 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

Tax mess (0.00 / 0)

My hope is that, when the inevitable constitutional convention occurs, it is limited in scope. But the reality is that we will end up with a series of dangerous and flawed solutions -- spending caps, tax caps, the elimination of the "thorough and efficient" clause (the only thing that guarantees the state spends on poor schools), etc. -- but leaves the basic set-up in place (i.e, property taxes). We need spending reforms (municipal mergers, pension and employment reforms), but we also need a broad-based income tax to lessen our reliance on property tax (this would have the double bonus of removing the current incentives that towns have to overdevelop, bringing in tax ratables at the expense of infrastructure and the environment).

by: Hank Kalet @ Wed Dec 27, 2006 at 20:05:57 PM UTC

by: you @ soon

To post this comment click here:

Otherwise click cancel.

GOP opportunism knocks | 8 comments