|
|
|
| |
Three Ring Circus
Sept. 1, 2010 REAL HEADLINES PROSECUTOR RELEASES PROBE INTO UNDERSHERIFF
Aug. 31, 2010
PONDERABLES * Why do politicians who know the least, know it the loudest? * How can they arrest you for being “legally drunk”, if it’s legal?
Aug. 30, 2010
GOOD NEWS – BAD NEWS Good news- Obama is talking to his economic team. The bad news? Obama is talking to his economic team.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Three Ring Circus Archive
|
|
|  |
|
|
|
| |
Daily Muse: CHRISTIE'S FIRST TEST
Posted on Tuesday, December 22 @ 11:24:57 PST by dailymuse |
|
|
|
|
| |
 Dec. 22, 2009
The caterwauling has begun.
Any one who thought that there would be legislative unity when it came to reducing the size of government got a cold dose of reality.
Kind of like that two feet of global warming that many New Jerseyans spent the last two days digging out from under.
Any way, state Democrats are criticizing Gov.-elect Chris Christie for refusing to back off his pledge to repeal that tax hike on families earning more than $400,000.
"He’ll give millionaires a tax cut, but he doesn’t want to give more aid to food pantries?" said incoming Senate President Steve Sweeney. "We will definitely point that out."
"He’s got to take a step back from that tax cut," said state Sen. Joe Vitale. "This is reverse Robin Hood. You’re taking from the poor and you’re giving to the rich. I’m telling you that just won’t happen. This is going to be one long summer."
"It’s nonsense," said Assemblyman Joe Cryan. "He’s helping the rich with this and leaving the middle-class to fend for itself."
Even Tom Moran, whose return to the Star Ledger editorial pages was one of the happy events of 2009, called this decision Christie’s “first mistake.”
We disagree.
In fact, we think of it as Christie’s first test. And so far, so good.
When Democrats passed that tax hike, they promised it would be for just one year.
And now some are saying, we need that $1 billion. Look at what we’ll have to cut.
But that’s the point.
New Jersey state spending is unsustainable. We cannot continue to tax ourselves into oblivion, no matter how noble the program.
It is not hyperbole to say New Jersey is at the breaking point.
So the news from the Star-Ledger that Christie’s transition team has sent memos to state departments, seeking potential cuts of 15%, 20% and 25% made us take note.
“Doomsday” memos like these are not all that unusual – even Gov. Corzine asked his Cabinet for potential reductions.
But what is unusual is language like this:
"The current situation requires the state to review its operations, to determine which functions should continue and which no longer are necessary," the memo said. "Revenue enhancements in place of reductions will not be considered at this time."
The memo told departments “across the board reductions are not to be submitted; instead consideration should be given to the elimination of ineffective programs or the consolidation of duplicative programs."
That is not typical language. It indicates that Christie is not interested in tinkering around the edges – but will instead significantly cut government.
Add that to Christie’s recent announcement that he planned to reduce the number, size and scope of the hundreds of state boards, commissions and authorities, and one almost begins to have hope that New Jersey government is about to be whittled down to size.
Of course, we’ll have to wait and see what Christie does when he takes office. But so far, he already sounds light years ahead of where Jon Corzine was.
Because here’s the thing we hope Christie'sopponents remember. Our state is facing a $9.5 billion shortfall on a $29 billion budget. That means we have overspent by one-third – and that’s even with that tax hike on wealthier families.
If one out of every $3 the state spends is money we don’t have, then how can the state keep spending money? Yes, food pantries and expanding health insurance are important. But so is making New Jersey affordable again.
Our state is at a crossroads. Business as usual has to go by the waysides. Once we get our state back on its feet, then we can reconsider what else we should spend money on.
But New Jersey can no longer rely on knee-jerk outrage over individual cuts. What our lawmakers should be outraged over is that the state kept spending money even when the four horsemen of the state’s Apocalypse were circling the golden dome. Remember, even after Corzine shut down state government, the state budget increased by 20% in Corzine’s first two years.
But that would require lawmakers to be outraged over their own actions. And therein lies the rub.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| | The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
No Comments Allowed for Anonymous, please register |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Re: CHRISTIE'S FIRST TEST (Score: 1)
by concerned on Tuesday, December 22 @ 12:22:27 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | | Chris, you need to pull a Tom Kean on this one. Kean ran in 1981 on a promise to cut the income and sales taxes but taking office in a recesison he reversed field and raised BOTH. The economy took off, the money rolled in, and he was reelected with 70% of the vote. No one even remembered his tax-cut pledge. Do yourself and the state a favor and don't make this a macho test or a Lonegan pander. Do what's right fort he state and it will be right for you too. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Re: CHRISTIE'S FIRST TEST (Score: 1)
by reprise8 on Wednesday, December 23 @ 05:09:24 PST
(User Info | Send a Message) | Tom Kean raising taxes had as much to do with the economy as his astrological sign. The economy took off because Reagan got his tax cuts enacted - tax cuts that dwarfed the increases of state taxes.
Actually, it can be argued that Kean served as an enabler, helping the state into its current condition. We are the most heavily taxed state. If raising taxes is the solution that will lead us to prosperity, shouldn't NJ be prospering by now? How much is necessary? Should the average homeowner pay 30,000 in property taxes? How about a 25% sales tax? let's tack on 25% on top of whatever the fed already takes in income taxes. Will that be enough to bring back the good times?
The first thing I'd do is take the names of the 55 "curriculum supervisors" in the Newark School District, put them in a hat, pick out 45 and fire them. Then tell the remaining 10 that they will have to buckle down, do an honest half day of work, and pick up the slack. If they complain, show them the door. I'm sure any one of the 45 would gladly take any complainers place.
'
Repeat that procedure in every municipal, county, and state department.
Only then should we look at the department or agency and determine whether it's necessary at all, or if it is, how many workers are really necessary to run it efficiently Eliminate additional positions, consolidate, and fire more as needed.
Then return the money to the taxpayers in the form of tax cuts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
