Public Wants No Pain, All Gain: A New Call For A Constitutional Convention

Quiche In The Morning (3.83 / 6)

Rate this comment like you would rate the diary

---

by: nathanrudy @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 16:23:34 PM UTC

BTW, Dick Codey has been fairly responsible. Lumping him in with Chris Christie isn't helpful. n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 16:40:49 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You Missed Nathan's Point.... (0.00 / 0)

And all 101.5 has to do is say, "Corzine is stealing your money with a tax hike!" and you see a movement to knife the governor in some back alley and bring in Dick Codey or Chris Christie, neither of whom could do anything about this situation that would make the public happy either.

As I understand what Nathan Rudy is saying in this diary; no future governor (or present governor) can effectively deal with this situation without a constitutional convention.

So, in the sense that Codey and Christie are potential future governors; they both fall into a general category...I don't hear Rudy isn't saying that they are necessarily alike in any other sense.

(I'm still thinking about whether or not I agree with the actual thesis of this diary....and will likely get back here to comment on that later.)

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 17:50:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just using the top from each side (0.00 / 0)

Was not equating the two by any criteria except Codey would be the instant favorite for the Ds and Christie is already running as an R.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:30:59 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Two different questions (4.00 / 2)

One question is what do we want to pay for.  If we want the benefits of "home rule," that isn't going to be cheap.

The second question is how do we pay for it.  The property tax is one of the unfairest ways to pay for government services, especially education.

We would be much better off if the Governor had taken advantage of the opportunities of the past two years to cut out all the "one shots" out of the budget and rationalize public employee compensation.  He could have vetoed every "Christmas Tree item" because we can't afford it.

He could have opposed the public question in 2006 to "dedicate" the half penny as well as the one this year to "dedicate" the whole penny for "property tax relief."

He definitely could have stuck to his earlier position and supported the constitutional convention.  This is one of the downsides of not having I&R because we can't do it directly.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 16:39:57 PM UTC

Two things ... (0.00 / 0)

I fail to see any benefit to home rule now that people move so quickly across borders.  You don't have towns made up of families that have been there for generations, and so the people exercising home rule have no sense of history, of impact or -- often -- care for future impact.  

Second is on Initiative and Referendum.  Yeah, it's too bad we can't get the convention that way, but then the other side could get a convention that is wholly irresponsible and insane that way, too.

I&R is a two edged sword -- if we can use it so can they, and while there are more of us they have a higher percentage of true believers to work such ballot questions.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:34:07 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

home rule and I&R (4.00 / 1)

I would like to see a bunch of referenda on consolidating services, etc.  I doubt if most of them would pass, but at least the public would be given a choice.

I have many concerns about I&R too.  I was more wistful since the promises were made and then not kept.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 03:39:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

public "opinion" (4.00 / 2)

Right you are, Nathan--people want all those services but don't want to pay for them.  I forget who it was who said that "taxes are the price we pay for living in a civilized society," but he was right.  Of course nobody in Trenton is going to talk about restoring a progressive income tax--they all remember what happened to Jim Florio.  But that's the only fair solution.

"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."  (Teddy Roosevelt)

---

by: DottieG @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 18:53:21 PM UTC

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes n/t (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 19:12:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Thanks, Creed! (0.00 / 0)

I knew I could count on you or another one of the Blue Jersey literati to refresh my memory.  Who says culture is dead?

"Do what you can, with what you have, where you are."  (Teddy Roosevelt)

---

by: DottieG @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 23:16:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

amen Dottie (4.00 / 1)

As someone who worked for Florio against Corzine in 2000, I wholeheartedly agree that the only solution is a restoration of the progressive income tax.

Imagine where we would be today if we could go back in time to 1993, re-elect Florio, and watch as all of the red ink disappears.

Does anybody want to speculate who would be Governor today if Florio had been re-elected in 1993?  Would Jim McGreevey win the Democratic nomination in 1997 or would better times have yielded better candidates?

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 20:27:54 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Corzine opposed Bush's tax cuts (0.00 / 0)

He supports a progressive income tax, and even came out and said it's ridiculous how low his taxes are.

There's a difference between supporting it and being able to enact it.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:35:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

referring to state income taxes... (0.00 / 0)

...and Corzine has already said on a number of occasions that an increase in state income taxes on the rich is a nonstarter.

If he had the guts, he could enact this.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 06:35:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If the leg had the guts (0.00 / 0)

he could enact it.  There are 120 other people who have to have the guts, too.

It's also a more fair way to raise revenue, but it's still just raising more revenue.

The problems are related to structural flaws in our government more than they are to our ability to generate revenue.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 13:22:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Corzine Has The Bully Pulpit.... (0.00 / 0)

.....he has just barely started to try to use it.

If Corzine truly chose to; he could lead the people of NJ into a totally renewed transformed political reality.

There is a desperate hunger for change amongst the average human residing in NJ...it's just buried under tons of cynicism.......and the creatures of the status quo do all they can to keep it that way.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 18:15:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

From The Frying Pan Into The Fire? (0.00 / 0)

Nathan makes extremely valid points/arguments for why why folks are loath to accept sacrifice...but I sense that there's more to it.   And, yes, there are structural reforms needed that a truly productive CC might address!

Unfortunately, New Jersey's body politic has become extremely cynical (and with good reason) about the obvious corruption (albeit legal) that permeates all levels of governance.   People talk to each other about "what's going on"; it's no secret that it's all about money and "connections".  

So when they are being asked to "sacrifice" they KNOW that the "fat cats" and the "old boy's clubs" will still be eating high on the hog....and they rightfully resent it.  

The more I look at it and think about it, the clearer it becomes to me that the people feeding off the status quo will feel no "pain" unless/until the laws (which enable them) themselves are changed.....and that's what I believe should be our priority/agenda as progressives/activists.

If we were to have a constitutional convention before we cleaned up the pay to play system; I suspect that way too many of the delegates would have ties to that morally/ethically corrupt system and that they would use the opportunity to further lock in their "gains".

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 19:51:33 PM UTC

fantasy and reality (0.00 / 0)

Expecting to take the politics out of government before anything gets done is simply a recipe for failure.  "Pay to play," "wheeling," "dual office holding," etc. contributes to waste in government, but if they all went away tomorrow; it would not be a cure.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 20:50:45 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

We're Making Progress!!! (0.00 / 0)

It seems you equate

"Pay to play," "wheeling," "dual office holding," etc.

with the

"politics"

I truly do wish to take those elements out of government; guilty as charged!  (Though, obviously, 100% purity would be a fantasy....that's not happening any time soon.)

What you see as politics as usual; I see as abjectly corrupt.  It would seem we each live in different worlds.

Cleaning up the overall system to a far higer degree of integrity is a pre-requisite to having a constitutional convention for the reasons I've already stated above.

Thanks for making it so clear!

---

by: Nick Lento @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:51:48 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, I live in the state of New Jersey... (4.00 / 3)

...in the nation of The United States of America on the planet Earth.  Most of the time you seem to live on Mount Olympus with sojourns to La-La-Land.

Those of us who work in reality have to deal with things as they are while we try to move them to where we would like them to be.

Obviously, it is much easier to simply dwell in the fantasy world to start with, but you wind up achieving nothing in the real world the rest of us inhabit.  So, you continue being a legend in your own mind.  We'll try to keep the noise down.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 03:45:36 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Your Attempted Insults Tell Me I'm On The Right Track!!! Thank You My Friend!!! Love Ya!!! n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Nick Lento @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 18:18:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The only chance... (0.00 / 0)

The governor has in convincing the public (myself included) that cuts are not possible, is to lay out what we spent and what we recieved in 1998, and what we are spending and what we are recieving in 2008.
The public is not stupid. (at least, I hope the majority of us aren't)
If the governor can really demonstrate to us what these services are and what stands to be cut, I think he has chance.
But as I said, I don't buy the argument that cuts automatically mean less police, hospitals, prison guards, without seeing the entire picture, and I don't believe the general public will either.
That being said, I definitely agree that constitutional convention is in a better position to make tough choices than letting the legislature get muscled by special interest money.  

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

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 20:21:42 PM UTC

It's not that they aren't stupid (4.00 / 2)

It's that they don't pay attention.

The last two budgets the Governor has put forward charts that demonstrate a huge majority of all spending is fixed and not discretionary.  

We're talking pensions, health care, debt service, etc.

That's why he went for pension and health care concessions in the last union negotiations, and is trying to find a way to cut our debt right now.  

But the fact is that most people simply won't believe it if you hand it to them.  We did it time and time again at the local level, and still people would not believe we were running a tight ship.

In North Plainfield where I served the average residential property tax is about $6000, and of that less than $2500 is municipal taxes.  The rest is schools and county.

For that $2500 -- $208.03 a month -- people get police, fire protection, 100 miles of roads, 25 acres of parks, recreation for kids and adults, historical preservation, courts, a health department, leaf and brush pickup, animal control, bulk trash pickup, ambulance service, snow plowing, flood control to lower insurance rates, etc., etc., etc.

You could walk through each of these services and how a person took advantage of and benefited from them over the year and they would still say municipal taxes are too high.

Yet they will go out to dinner and eat high-calorie, artery clogging food three times a month for the same cost.

Or pay $60 a week ($240 a year) for lawn maintenance and snow plowing they could do themselves for almost free.

And STILL they say that the local taxes are not a bargain.

You can show them and show them and show them and it doesn't matter.

They want the same services (only better) for less money.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:46:25 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

This Is Where Leadership is Required.... (0.00 / 0)

Yet they will go out to dinner and eat high-calorie, artery clogging food three times a month for the same cost.

Or pay $60 a week ($240 a year) for lawn maintenance and snow plowing they could do themselves for almost free.

And STILL they say that the local taxes are not a bargain.

You can show them and show them and show them and it doesn't matter.

They want the same services (only better) for less money.

Maybe I am naive (I wonder who's going to quote that out of context lol); but I still believe that Governor Corzine has the potential to become a great governor/leader.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 18:23:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It can cost less (0.00 / 0)

Agree that taxpayers (everywhere, not just NJ) expect the same services for lower taxes. That's just human nature. But the point is there are municipalities in other states that provide all these services for a fraction of the cost (and on top of that citizens get county-run school districts that rate equal to or better than NJ's system on national rankings).

Your comment downthread hits it on the head. The toll plan is raising revenues, which is treating a symptom. The root cause is the way the state is run.  

---

by: westcoast @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 17:40:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I have no faith in a constitutional convention (0.00 / 0)

Why?

I don't believe that enough of the participants would be independent of the existing political power infrastructure in the state.

And even if they were, and produced a reasonable solution to the state's fiscal problems, if their solution involved any degree of real sacrifice, I don't believe that the public would support it and I don't believe that the state government would have the courage to implement it.

The only solution is to elect a Governor, State Senators, and State Assemblypersons with the guts to do the right thing and risk not being re-elected because of it.

2009 is the next Gubernatorial and State Assembly election.  It is probably too soon to be able to identify and recruit someone to take on Jon Corzine, Dick Codey, or whomever the Democratic establishment candidate might be as well as State Assembly candidates.

But 2011 is far enough away to build a statewide organization that will advocate for a legislative district map that creates 40 competitive districts and identifies/recruits courageous and progressive candidates to run in Democratic primaries for State Senate and State Assembly seats.

I don't foresee any real progress happening until this happens first.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 20:43:37 PM UTC

Really? (0.00 / 0)

You don't think we can elect delegates to a Constitutional Convention that are outside the current power structure, but you think we can elect a Governor and legislature that is?  To me, that seems a bit off.

The proposal for a convention actually includes public money for ordinary people to run and limits what anyone can spend on the campaign.  That will help allow outsiders in to the field to campaign on an even footing.

Additionally, the folks in the convention will have no other items on the table for horsetrading like they do in the legislature.  There's no Prosecutor to trade a budget vote for, or Highlands bill to trade a Meadowlands slots vote for.  It'll be a lot less beneficial for people to trade favors in a convention.

And another safeguard is that no legislators or elected officials will be allowed to run.  That limits the field quite a bit.  People would have to resign their seats to run.  I would have if I still held mine.

I think it'll be a lot easier to get a quality group of folks for a Convention, and a lot easier to get things done in a Convention, that it has proven to be to get a better legislature/Governor and get things done under that system.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 01:52:45 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

correct me if I am wrong, but... (0.00 / 0)

...I don't think that the product of a Constitutional Convention would be automatically implemented.  It would have to pass the legislature, get signed by the Governor, and possibly even survive a November referendum.

Even if a CC consisted of the best, brightest, and most well-meaning citizens in the state, which is unlikely, if they produce solutions that are remotely controversial, it is very likely that their recommendations would be blocked or watered down by the legislature.

But if these same best, brightest, and well-meaning citizens organized themselves to lobby for a legislative district map that produces 40 competitive legislative districts, ran candidates in each of these districts, and presented their solutions to the public as a comprehensive policy agenda, I believe that they could have a much greater impact going forward.

The downside of this is that these efforts wouldn't begin to bear fruit until 2012 at the earliest.  By then it might be too late.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 16:33:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Just a referendum (0.00 / 0)

It doesn't have to go back to the leg or governor.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Sat Jan 19, 2008 at 19:06:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Difference between identifying a problem and selecting the right solution (0.00 / 0)

I would hope that all of us would agree that NJ's finances are in a mess.  I would hope that all of us would agree that there are areas where too much is being spent, others where it isn't been spent wisely and others where more needs to be spent.

The areas of agreement probably end there.  Designating which areas fit each of those categories generates arguments.

Then, we get to the solutions.  I already answered the challenge to put up an alternative, not a pretty one (but there aren't any pretty ones) but a workable alternative (at least more workable than the plan being presented).  So, I can say that the "fiscal restructuring" plan presents a lot of problems and would not appear to even solve the problems it identifies.

It is an exercise in sophistry to say that "we have severe problems," so we have to go along with the "Governor's plan" because it is the only plan.  It is even worse when the "Governor's plan" isn't even complete.  What happens if the IRS doesn't approve the PBC issuing tax-exempt bonds to refinance another authority's tax-exempt bonds (for example)?  Is that a deal-breaker?  Are we going to have an answer to that before springtime?  How can the Legislature vote on this when they don't even know that?

Or, which bonds are going to be paid off or defeased (which actually means that money is set aside to pay them as they come due)?  These are two different things.  I am not a bond attorney so we are moving to the current limit of my knowledge base, but we really need to get a lot of answers.

In many ways, this strikes me as taking the path of least resistance to a "broad-based tax" increase.  We should just say that we need to increase the gas tax and the Turnpike/Parkway tolls.  It isn't pretty, but it is honest and is under our control as the voters and taxpayers.  It may not be perfectly transparent, but it is a model of openness compared to what the PBC would be.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 19:39:09 PM UTC

Toll Plan Is Not About Fixing The Problem (0.00 / 0)

The toll plan is only about creating a revenue source to reduce our debt.  It is not intended to address the structural flaws in our system that make providing reasonable services unaffordable.

The Republicans would like us to think we have too many governmental services and need to reduce service to the people.

But we can afford all the services we are providing.  We just can't afford to provide them the way we currently are in our current structure.

The problem is too many governments, not too many services.  Reduce the number of governments all doing the same thing and you will reduce the cost of providing services.

It's simple and can be done just like a corporate restructuring.  

And if we don't do it we'll be looking for another new revenue source five years, 10 years, 15 years down the line.

---

by: nathanrudy @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 03:36:05 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If we do that, (0.00 / 0)

then we may not need the "savings" identifed in the "plan."  One of the very ambiguous parts of the plan is which bonds are going to be "defeased."  Defeasing a bond means that a sufficient amount of secure money (like T-bills) is set aside to make the payments as needed.  This may make sense if you have bonds that are non-callable (can't be redeemed early), but you would make more money on the interest on the secure money than you lose paying the bonds as they mature.  However, if these bonds were let at 5% when the Fed rate was 1% and now the Fed rate is much higher, then how do we come out ahead.  That may be why the "savings" in the "plan" go down dramatically after the first ten years.

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 18:00:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A few comments (0.00 / 0)

I was the chair of a South Jersey group lloking to push for reform including the convention.  I'd like to offer a few comments:

1.    The "fixed" costs ARE flexible.  It is eliminating jobs and laying off not needed workers.  All of us know we have way too many "public" employees (at all levels) for the land mass and population of this state.

2.    I agree any output of a convention will have a tough time passing the general population.  The unions, bosses, and others will blast the air waves telling the doom and gloom.  Any "cuts" will be "draconian".  "Your kids will be bused into Camden", etc...

3.    If we have no faith in the legislature and no faith we can elect 80 honest delegates then it is time to move out of state.

4.    Move revenue into the treasury is NOT the solution.  If you had been listening to NJ101.5 they have been saying cut spending and fat FIRST.  Do a complete audit FIRST.  Present all alternatives FIRST before you expect us to mortgage our great-grandchildren.  It is not just killing the idea.

5.    Increasing the tolls will not only hurt drivers but will raise the cost of all goods, which means towns and schools will have to pay more.

6.    Why am I paying taxes into two different school districts?  Why aren't all districts K - 12?

I can go on for hours....

---

by: AreYouWithMe? @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 16:52:14 PM UTC

which group? n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: Creed Pogue @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 18:00:30 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Shared Services (0.00 / 0)

We have to be careful not to use too broad a brush in defining what the causes of high costs are.

As a councilmember who will be working on our Borough's budget for the next few months, and as Fire Commissioner, I need to dispel some myths here.  We have very little discretionary income to work with - most of our Fire Departments are VOLUNTEER and work together supplying mutual aid and sharing equipment already. High costs in my experience stem from mandated State Increases for pensions and benefits and increases from the Board of Education.  It's hard to rein in spending when it's hard to say no to the BOE, especially when most NJ residents don't realize that the BOE decides where 2/3 of their taxes go.  A Supervisor of Schools at the County Level would definitely rein in spending at the Municipal level as Assemblywoman Huttle suggests.  Currently our school superintendents have little oversight.  

We could also make a start by cutting spending at the County level.  It has turned into a Party Boss ATM.  Whenever the Party Bosses need a carrot to give out, a new County job suddenly materializes.  That costs more for everyone as does the Utilities Authorities that have the ability to spend taxpayer money with no oversight which was pointed out by Senator Weinberg last fall.
If the people elected or appointed to State positions are beholden to the Party Bosses for their re-election or appointments, that makes making the hard decisions at the State level that much harder.  

We need to change the government, not just the tolls.

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 18:49:20 PM UTC