Now's the time to join the party

by: Heather_Taylor

Mon Mar 28, 2011 at 01:55:36 PM EDT

People understand that they need to participate in the political process if they want results. For most that participation is limited to showing up on Election Day and casting a vote, for the more engaged it may be going door to door and helping out in a specific candidate's campaign.

What we don't often recognize is that those individuals who assume party leadership have a direct impact on which candidates run and what issues are on the party platform (if any).  These positions are available to ANY concerned citizen and the time to seize the power is now.

The great thing about serving on the county committee is that it does not require a large investment of time, and provides a large measure of control of who represents us in Trenton.

In addition to electing the county party chair and awarding the party line for Senate and Assembly seats along with local offices, the county committee members participate in filling vacancies in office when someone resigns in disgrace, retires, or passes away. Shockingly, more than a third of the legislature has entered office by way of a vote of the county committee, not the general public.

It's because the county committees wield so much power that Senator Loretta Weinberg (D-37) and Senator Diane Allen (R-7) sponsored the Party Democracy Act, to ensure the political parties adopt rules and procedures ensuring fundamental fairness and guaranteeing a secret ballot when making important votes.  The Party Democracy Act was signed into law in 2009, and now every Republican and Democratic voter is offered a fair chance to vote their conscience.

So if you're ready to do something, here are some basic tips for running for county committee. 1) Find out from your municipal clerk which political party committee seats are up for election this year; 2) Complete the Party Declaration Form (Democratic or Republican Party) for the County Committee you wish to run for; 2) Get a petition & required number of signatures from the municipal clerk (in most cases no more than 10 signatures needed); 3) File the petition with your town clerk by April 11th; 4) Show up on June 7th with your family and friends and vote for yourself (most seats are won with just a few dozen votes or less).

Visit www.TheCitizensCampaign.com and take our free, half-hour online class and learn the tips and tools to become a successful neighborhood party leader.  

Once elected, you have the power to adopt or amend your party constitution, create your party platform, and seek the chairmanship of your county party.

The bottom line is, if you want to gain these powers, then you need to take this opportunity to step up to the plate.

Your NJ Education System Explained!

by: Jersey Jazzman

Sun Mar 13, 2011 at 09:54:10 PM EDT

Rosi asked me to post my diagram explaining the NJ Education System over here at Blue Jersey. I asked her to give me a few days to refine it; now, way later than I promised, here it is:

The explanation is below the fold, but you can also read it and follow the many links to sources at the Jersey Jazzman blog.

Christie Rejects Arbitration Proposals

by: brendanod

Wed Nov 24, 2010 at 01:38:18 PM EST

http://blog.nj.com/njv_editori...

His typical behavior has created an interesting scenario.  Does Christie stand his ground and try and twist some democratic arms (besides the alliances he has forged with the pathetic Essex Dems) to ram through his own proposals?  Does Sweeney and Oliver hold their ground out of fear their core constituency will turn on them as primaries inch ever so closer??  Thus far the democrats have turned their backs to labor nearly as much as Christie has.  I suspect labor will be very energetic for the primaries and for the general in 2011.  Labor has been hammered by the Governor over the past year.  The governor's policies and grandstanding has angered the NJEA, police and fire, CWA, ect..  Trade unions were already hurting because of the recession, Christie's dumping of the ARC has amplified the number of trade labor members going on the dole.

Christie won the governorship because many union members voted their social values and ignored the endorsements of their respective unions.  Those votes are gone now, social values are going to take a back seat to pocketbooks.  I don't know how much longer the Dem's can ignor labor.  Often there will be splits between private and public sector unions.  That spilt is gone as well.

Labor is going to be unified, organized, and ready to spend some money as the primaries near.  Christie drew a line in the sand over this arbitration issue,  will the Dem's push back on this one or let Christie win again?

Christie pension/health benefit" BOO-HOO"getting old

by: firstamend07

Tue Oct 12, 2010 at 07:18:16 PM EDT

Once again the press backs off from asking him," If you want reform now then why do you not open negotiations with the unions and get reform without input from the Legislature?"

Does Christie not understand that pension and health benefit reform can occur INDEPENDENT of the Legislature if he simply negotiates the changes during the coming contract negotiations which he can start immediately?

His whining on this issue has gotten old.

The budget and prisons

by: Hopeful

Sun Sep 19, 2010 at 02:47:27 PM EDT

When judges here sentence convicted criminals, a new and unusual variable is available for them to consider: what a given punishment will cost the State of Missouri....

Legal experts say no other state systematically provides such information to judges, a practice put into effect here last month by the state's sentencing advisory commission, an appointed board that offers guidance on criminal sentencing.

Defense lawyers and (some) fiscal conservatives like it, while as you can imagine prosecutors are unhappy: "Justice isn't subject to a mathematical formula," said one.  

Let's look at Governor Christie's budget documents. The state department of corrections spends over $800 million a year on state prisons. The Budget in Brief(PDF) puts this number in perspective. If you consider the actual state government  -- the "Direct State Services" on page 69 -- the Department of Correction is 28% of the total, almost double the next largest department!  Well, if you followed the campaign last year you remember that you could convince every state worker to work for free yet still not close the state's budget gap: My previous calculation doesn't include school aid, municipal aid, higher education, hospitals, etc. Compared to the total state budget, we're talking "only" 3% of the total budget. Nevertheless, it seems to me that providing this kind of factual information to judges would be very worthwhile. No doubt there are many robbers who should be imprisoned at a total cost of $50K each rather than $9K probation, to use an example from the article, but sometimes the savings is worthwhile.

If we are to enter a new age of conservative austerity, let judges be aware of what they're spending.  

Is this a joke?

by: Hopeful

Tue Sep 07, 2010 at 03:20:01 PM EDT

"We can't wait any longer for these reforms to be done," Christie told a mostly friendly crowd of about 250 in a Republican bastion. "One hundred and seven days is plenty of time for the guys and women in the Legislature to get down to work and get things done."

...Christie outlined broad themes, leaving most specifics to be unveiled at four more town hall meetings around the state through the month, ...

So, about 25% of those days will spent waiting for Governor Christie to get around to telling us what he's talking about.

Move on off Race for the Top. Look over there! Look it's a SHINY OBJECT LOOK LOOK NOW! SHINY SHINY!

by: Rosi Efthim

Thu Sep 02, 2010 at 05:41:17 PM EDT

Assembly Republican Minority Leader Alex DeCroce's SHINY OBJECT:

Even if the administration did everything right, the Obama administration was never going to give the governor a nickel," DeCroce said. "There was no chance he was going to get that money from D.C.

Gov. Chris Christie's SHINY OBJECT: Gov. Chris Christie to Delaware River Port Authority: Come Up With Reforms -- And Fast.

Hearings: They're coming. And they'd better be well-run, with tough questions asked. That's the direction I'm looking in. Screw the shiny objects. Keep your eye on the ball, NJ Legislature.  

The True Costs of Police Misconduct

by: Deborah Jacobs, ACLU-NJ Executive Director

Wed Jul 07, 2010 at 09:33:46 AM EDT

A jury awarded Darren Nance $600,000, finding that the Newark Police had racially discriminated and retaliated against him.

Once lawyers tally up interest for this verdict, legal fees for his attorneys, plus the two private law firms hired to defend Newark, this case will likely cost millions.

Most cities rely on insurance to cover misconduct-based payouts, but Newark is deemed too high risk to qualify for a policy. Instead, these payouts come out of the pockets of Newark taxpayers. And for every case like Nance's that goes to trial, many others settle out of court behind closed doors.

It is difficult to know, therefore, the full financial impact of police misconduct on Newark  taxpayers. We're also left in the dark about the details of the misconduct at the center of those cases, and whether the officers involved are sanctioned.

This is a shame because lawsuits - especially settled ones - can reveal dangerous practices in a department. And when individual officers are openly held accountable for the misconduct, it can deter others from engaging in similar acts.

To determine how much police misconduct cases cost Newark, and shed light on the underlying abuses, the ACLU of New Jersey has combed court databases, City Council minutes and other public records to find settlements.

We found that since January 2008, nine lawsuits by Newark police officers against the City were settled, with the settlements totaling $1,696,503. These cases primarily involve discrimination and retaliation.

Lawsuits from officers are just the tip of the iceberg. In that same time period, Newark  awarded at least 23 payouts to citizens filing lawsuits over mistreatment ranging from false arrest to death in custody. Those, too, come with a hefty price tag - $766,617 from the 18 cases for which we have settlement amounts.

More cases are coming through the pipeline. We have identified 27 pending cases ordinary citizens have filed against the Newark Police since January 2008, and seven more filed by employees.

And there are likely others; since information about these lawsuits is not publicly disseminated or maintained in a centralized placed, we couldn't find every case filed against the Newark Police.

The costs go well beyond finances, of course. Lawsuits aside, police misconduct jeopardizes community safety and erodes the trust officers need from community members to effectively protect and serve.

But money matters, too, especially during a budget crisis. If the money Newark spends  to defend and compensate for police officers' mistakes went towards reforms instead - training, technology, and resources for police - it would save money, lives, and public confidence in the long run.

The ACLU-NJ has an unwavering commitment to both government transparency and sound police practices. For the public's benefit, starting today, the ACLU-NJ will publish "the dirty dozen" of these cases on our website - representing some of the most egregious claims of discrimination, retaliation, beatings, and internal affairs corruption. We will release one a day for the next twelve business days. Many of these settlements have never before seen the light of day.

Darren Nance, however, got his day in court. He started his career as a Newark police officer in 1989 and encountered racism in the department after just a few months on the job. He spent the next seven years fighting for his rights, until the Newark Police fired him in 1996.

The jury verdict for Nance, along with these settlements, demonstrates that justice for police abuses can indeed come. But it also demonstrates a disturbing pattern: we see the abuses described in Nance's complaints from 15 years ago repeated in the settlements and pending lawsuits of today. The ACLU-NJ, which turned 50 this year, has fought the same kinds of abuses against Newark Police since our founding; change is overdue.

The only way to prevent the same mistakes, the same wounds, and the same payouts from the same stories is root out their sources. Otherwise, the citizens of Newark will continue to pay for bad apple officers who engage in abusive conduct and for managers and elected officials who fail to fix the underlying problems.

Bring Back the Daggett Plan

by: Winston Smith

Sun May 23, 2010 at 02:05:30 PM EDT

At the time, I naively had hoped that Daggett's analytical policy based approach to politics would change the Trenton conversation and force media to engage the substance.

And for a fleeting moment in late September it did.

Daggett's plan ran in detail on page one Star Ledger, and the media actually engaged the substance of an issue.

But man was I wrong in terms of Daggett's ability to alter the conversation and inject more substance into media and the political debate.

It was amazing how quickly Daggett's plan fell into obscurity.

After just weeks, things reverted to the same old politics.

This only opened the door to the Christie "shock doctrine" (N. Klein) and retrograde ideological attack on all things public (while diverting attention away from the finance industry Wall Street types that caused the economic collapse at the heart of the state budget crisis).

Amazingly, while the rest of the country is in populist outrage over the greed of Wall Street and the obscenity of the taxpayer bailout while homeowners are foreclosed on and Main Street is ignored, the cowardly corporate NJ democrats and media have allowed Christie to stand reality on its head: attack teachers, librarians, and social workers as the greedy ones!

In addition to Wall Street anger, the whole world can see how failure to regulate BP led directly to the gulf oil disaster - and a mine explosion that killed 25 workers. (Tuesday nite, PBS Frontlinewill run a story about how cost cutting and lax safety regulation results in plane crashes).

But, despite this hugely visible reality of what happens when safety and environmental regulations are gutted for corporate profits, Chrisitie is allowed to target environmental regulations (aka "red tape") as the cause of the recession.  

In the Orwellian Chrisitie world, it's not Wall Street,  corporations, and deregulation that are to blame, it's greedy teachers, ibrarians, unions, and environmental regulations!

So, let's bring back the Daggett analytical approach to policy and re-examine key aspects of the Daggett plan.

This would include a focuse on broadening the sales tax to the currently untaxed service sector to better fit the shift in the economy. This would levy the burden on those in the financial sector that are most able to afford to pay.

Of course the Daggett plan would have to be modified to include restoring the $400,000 income threshold (no need to raise it to a million, which was a ploy to support a slogan "millionaire's tax") and get rid of his call for corporate and wealthy tax relief:

The candidate's plan, which he devised over several months using independent studies and state budget numbers, also would reduce corporate taxes by $750 million and income taxes on the state's wealthiest residents by $620 million. To compensate, Daggett proposed eliminating $1.6 billion in property tax relief programs like rebates.

Independent N.J. governor candidate Chris Daggett proposes overhaul of tax system

http://www.nj.com/news/index.s...

Reform in the wrong direction

by: Hopeful

Fri May 21, 2010 at 01:48:15 PM EDT

Legislators and other part-time elected and appointed public officials would no longer be entitled to taxpayer-funded health and pension benefits for their current positions under a bill recently introduced by Assemblyman Domenick DiCicco.

           "Taxpayers have shared in the sacrifice to correct New Jersey's excessive government spending, but those of us privileged to hold elective office should be leading by example," said DiCicco, R-Gloucester and Camden. "Overtaxed New Jerseyans should not be paying for generous health and pension benefits to part-time public officials."

Obviously this has a certain attraction but I actually think it's reform in the wrong direction. A wiser reform would be to make state legislators full-time, with health benefits and defined retirement contributions (since it's not meant to be a lifetime job). That was we would be spared the spectacle of New Jersey legislators becoming paid "consultants" by firms seeking political advantage, or also serving as lawyers "representing" towns getting state money. It may be a satisfying to call legislators part-time workers but that illusion is linked to many conflicts of interest.    

NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE, UPSIDE DOWN AND INSIDE OUT!!!

by: IndependentNJ

Sun Mar 28, 2010 at 05:27:36 PM EDT

For one thing, New Jersey is the only state in the union in which assemblypersons and senators represent the same number of constituents. I find it a bit disheartening that there are 40 districts, and each district has 1 senator and two assemblypeople representing the same number of people. For one thing, it only gives larger constituencies in each district a voice.

This is why I propose splitting each legislative district into A and B and having one assemblyperson for each. For example, the 14th District as is will have one senator, and Assembly District 14A will consist of one assembly person representing Hamilton and West Windsor while Assembly District 14B will consist of one assemblyperson representing Plainsboro, Cranbury, South Brunswick, Monroe, and Jamesburg. This way, smaller constituencies within a district have more of a chance of being represented (especially true for ethnic minorities, who tend to be extremely scattered throughout the state).

Another major issue is that in the state legislature, a bill is voted on in the Senate first. This extremely baffles me to no end, is this some kind of statement that public policy in New Jersey is top down. Since senators sometimes serve longer terms (2-4-4), have larger constituencies, and a smaller membership, they are not as close as the assembly is to the constituency, and thus, legislation tends to be top down in New Jersey's setup.

I think these two ideas as a package would be great for politics in the state. It would create smaller targetted constitencies and public policy could be more easily influenced by the grassroots.

The cracked of each district into A and B assembly districts would actually be good for progressives. The only exception would be District 1, in which it would be likely that 1 district would contain Cape May County and Somers Point and 1 district would contain Vineland, Millville, Maurice River, Buena, and Buena Vista, which means it would be 1 conservative district and 1 progressive district.

However, progressives could benefit everywhere else, especially in the following districts:

District 2 - If Atlantic City and Pleasantville are included together in one of the A or B districts, we would have 1 strong D district and 1 swing district.

District 8 - One assembly district could contain Evesham, Mount Laurel, Moorestown, and Hainesport. The latter two are boomtowns which are trending Democratic. However, the other assembly district would be hopelessly Republican

District 11 - One such idea would be to create one district that includes Asbury Park, Long Branch, as well as the swingier West Long Branch and Eatontown (remember, Pallone wins in this area), and leave the southern Monmouth shore teabaggers in the other.

District 12 - Could very well include 1 district with Democratic East Windsor and Hightstown, swingier Marlboro, Manalapan, and Eatontown, and heavily Republican but small Millstone. Could be a split LD!!!

District 13 - Could be a split LD, with one Democratic assembly district (dominated by Old Bridge) and one Republican assembly district (dominated by Middletown)

District 16 - The southern part of the LD could be a Democrat AD, if Somerville, Hillsborough, and Montgomery (all of which went for Obama) are included. However, the northern part is too wealthy for its own good and would be a safe AD for the GOP

District 21 - The eastern part of the legislative district, centred around Union County, could definitely hold a Democratic AD (many of the towns are wealthier, but have gone D in the past)

District 39 - The eastern part of the district, closer to the GWB has a lot of areas which can potentially go D, as has happened in the past and could be a good Democrat AD. The western and north central part, however, would still be an R AD.

All in all, this could result in a net gain of 7 seats for the Democrats.

Memo to Rep. Andrews:

by: TScheisskopf

Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 03:40:57 PM EDT

Nice percentage of uninsured you have there.

And as the gentle reader moves down, do peruse all columns of data for each NJ Rep, regardless of party affiliation. Welcome to Rising Gorge.

2700 pages

by: Jeff Doshna

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: