Republican Women of Mercer County

Gender gap in N.J. women's pay deserves attention

2012-02-09T17:22:00.003-05:00

Gender gap in N.J. women's pay deserves attention

Published: Thursday, February 09, 2012 Star-Ledger By Star-Ledger Editorial Board

It’s no secret that women are paid less than men for doing similar work. And any college grad who thought her higher degrees shielded her from the inequities in the salary structure, think again. The more education you have — and the older you are — the wider the pay gap with male counterparts.

This was the recession that hit men harder, sending them to the unemployment line. You can bet that behind the smaller workforce is an army of women doing twice as much work for substantially less pay than male colleagues. The unspoken warning silences dissent: Be grateful you have a job.

Rekindling outrage is a tough sell under these circumstances. Give Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt (D-Camden) credit for making an attempt. As chairwoman of the Women and Children Committee, Lampitt embraced the wage-gap issue. The committee passed a resolution urging Congress to pass the Paycheck Fairness Act, which would put some teeth into existing fair-pay laws.

Action in the polarized Congress is unlikely, but there’s value in Lampitt’s effort to spotlight the issue, said Sally Goodson, president of the American Association of University Women of New Jersey. For example, Lampitt told the committee that working women lose about $15.8 billion each year because of the wage gap.

Goodson, who testified before the committee, said stagnant salaries hurt more than women. “In this economy, where a lot of men lost their jobs, a woman’s salary is needed to cover more family expenses,” she said. “Without fair pay, it becomes extremely difficult.”

Add to that the aging of society, with women drawing pensions and Social Security checks far smaller than men will draw, and the problem takes on yet another dimension.

There’s a culture in place that stymies change: Private companies hold salary information close to the vest. Men are tougher negotiators when it comes to salary and benefits. Employees are generally discouraged from discussing salaries. “In this country,” Goodson said, “we’d talk about someone’s sex life rather than their financial status.”

But she also couldn’t help from wondering: “You told us to get educated, put more time on the job and be willing to work nights. We do all that and you still underpay us?”
Good question.

Kevin Mooney To Speak At The Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC)

2012-02-04T11:44:00.001-05:00

Kevin Mooney To Speak At

The Conservative Political

Action Conference (CPAC)

February 9-12

Marriott Wardman Park

Washington, D.C.

Click here to Register

Click here for Full Schedule of Events

Kevin Mooney is a Ewing Township native and served as a Mercer
County Republican Committeeman. He will be speaking at CPAC on Thursday, February 9th. The topic of his discussion will be, "The Return of Big Labor: What Can We Learn from Wisconsin & Ohio?"

Kevin is currently an investigative reporter and author who writes for several Washington D.C.-area based publications including: the Washington Times, Washington Examiner, BigGovernment.com, the Daily Caller, The American Spectator, the Capital Research Center, NewsBusters and NetRightDaily.com. He also works as an investigative reporter for The Pelican Institute, a free market think tank based in New Orleans, Louisiana.

Kevin previously worked as a reporter with CNSNews.com where he broke several news stories concerning border security policies, drug cartel activity and potential acts of terrorism.

Gov. Christie's 10 best quotes

2012-02-03T12:00:00.001-05:00

Gov. Christie's 10 best quotes
Politico
By: Mackenzie Weinger
February 3, 2012 10:06 AM EST

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is notorious for his putdowns and one-liners, and he added another Christie-ism this week by calling a local politician “numb nuts.” Here’s POLITICO’s top 10 best of Christie quotes:

1. “You have numb nuts like Reed Gusciora who put out a statement comparing me to George Wallace and Lester Maddox. Now, come on guys, at some point, you’ve got to able to call BS on those kind of press releases,” Jan. 30, 2012, on a pro-gay-marriage state assemblyman. (Christie later apologized.)

2. “First off it’s none of your business. I don’t ask you where you send your kids to school. Don’t bother me about where I send mine.” – June 17, 2011, on not wanting to discuss where he sends his kids to school.

3. “Get the hell of the beach in Asbury Park and get out. You’re done. It’s 4:30, you’ve maximized your tan. Get off the beach.” – Aug 26, 2011, encouraging people to leave as Hurricane Irene approached.

4. “They’re from New York. Snooki is from Poughkeepsie The Situation is from Staten Island. They parachuted these losers into New Jersey. And they want to make all of you believe that they’re in New Jersey. They’re not.” – Nov 16, 2011, sharing his feelings about the cast of MTV’s “Jersey Shore.”

5. “You know something may go down tonight, but it ain’t gonna be jobs, sweetheart.” – Jan. 8, 2012, after he was interrupted by protesters chanting “Christie kills jobs.”

6. “Man up and say I’m fat.” – Oct. 29, 2009, on then-Gov. Jon Corzine’s campaign ad that hinted at Christie’s weight.

7. “Cry me a river.” – Dec. 20, 2011, on President Barack Obama having to deal with a Republican House after two years of Democrats in power.

8. “Well, you know what then, you don’t have to do it.”— May 25, 2010, in response to a New Jersey teacher who said she should be paid more.

9. “You people disappoint me on Tuesday, you don’t do what you’re supposed to for Mitt Romney on Tuesday — I will be back, Jersey-style, people. I will be back.” — Dec. 30, 2011, to Romney supporters before the Iowa caucus.

10. “What the hell are we paying you for?” — Nov. 28, 2011, on Barack Obama acting as a “bystander” in the White House after the supercommittee failed to reached an agreement on debt reduction.

Readington committeewoman Donna Simon is selected to fill assembly seat of late Peter Biondi

2012-01-20T12:47:00.001-05:00

Published: Friday, January 20, 2012, 11:35 AM Updated: Friday, January 20, 2012, 12:43 PM

By Matt Friedman/Statehouse Bureau

TRENTON — Republicans from the 16th Legislative District last night picked Donna Simon as their new assemblywoman.

Simon, a Readington Township committeewoman, will fill the seat of the late Peter Biondi (R-Somerset), who died in November, two days after winning reelection.

Simon was overwhelmingly selected by Republican county committee members from the district’s towns in Somerset, Hunterdon, Middlesex and Mercer Counties. She will have to run again in a June primary and a November special election to fill out the remainder of the term.

According to state Sen. Sam Thompson, who is also Middlesex County Republican Chairman, Simon got 155 votes – three times as many as her nearest challenger.

Princeton real estate executive Bill Spadea came in second with 52 votes. John Saccenti of South Brunswick got 38 votes. And Whitehouse Station resident Barbara Sachau got zero votes.

Spadea had already said that if he did not prevail he would challenge the winner of the convention in the primary.

Come November, Democrats may pour significant resources into the race, which they lost by a slimmer than usual margin in November. The new legislative district map adopted last spring made the district, while still Republican-leaning, more competitive for Democrats than it had been.

“I’m sure the Democrats will say ‘What have we got to lose? We’ll take a shot at it,” said Thompson. “We’ll certainly do everything we can to retain the seat.”

GOP’s Election Battle Plan: Use Obama’s Own Words Against Him

2012-01-02T14:22:00.000-05:00

GOP’s Election Battle Plan: Use Obama’s Own Words Against Him

By Peter Wallsten

Washington Post

January 1, 2012

With Republican voters in Iowa set to finally begin picking a nominee to challenge President Obama, GOP officials in Washington are quietly and methodically finishing what operatives are calling “the book” — 500 pages of Obama quotes and video links that will form the backbone of the party’s attack strategy against the president leading up to Election Day 2012.

The document, portions of which were reviewed by The Washington Post, lays out how GOP officials plan to use Obama’s words and voice as they build an argument for his defeat: that he made specific promises and entered office with lofty expectations and has failed to deliver on both.

Republican officials say they will leverage the party’s newly catalogued video library containing every publicly available utterance from Obama since his 2008 campaign. Television and Internet ads will juxtapose specific Obama promises of job gains, homeowner assistance, help for people in poverty, lower health insurance premiums and stricter White House ethics standards against government data and news clippings that paint a different reality.

The decision by GOP officials to finalize a strategy at this stage underscores the view, in both parties, that the general-election campaign has begun — even if an official Republican nominee has not been selected.

The new GOP playbook is designed to take one of Obama’s great assets — the power of his oratory — and turn it into a liability. It details hundreds of potential targets, partially a result of a president who Republican strategists say is unusually prone to making detailed promises.

A 2009 Obama statement that his stimulus bill would lift 2 million Americans out of poverty, for example, is paired against census data showing that more than 6 million Americans have fallen into poverty since he took office. A pledge that an administration housing plan would “help between 7 and 9 million families restructure or refinance their mortgages” is paired against news reports showing the government spent far less than promised and aided fewer than 2 million.

And his 2008 Democratic nomination acceptance speech vow that a green jobs initiative would create 5 million jobs is matched up against news reports from this year depicting lackluster results and headlines about Solyndra, the failed maker of solar panels that received hundreds of millions in federal loan guarantees.

One Obama quote will be featured prominently: In 2009 he said on NBC’s “Today” show that if he could not fix the economy in three years, “then there’s going to be a one-term proposition.”

“That’s a clip the American people will hear and see over and over and over again throughout the next year,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus. “The nice thing about Barack Obama is that he’s given us plenty of material. The one thing he loves to do is give speeches.”

A similar in-his-own-words strategy has already been adopted by Obama’s campaign and the Democratic National Committee designed to portray GOP front-runner Mitt Romney as a flip-flopper.

A “Mitt vs. Mitt” online video, showing Romney expressing opposing views on various issues over time, gained considerable attention and prompted a new round of questions from primary rivals and journalists about whether Romney can be trusted.

With a campaign war chest expected to total at least $750 million, the Obama campaign and the DNC are likely to continue hammering Romney’s shifting stances on hot-button issues to portray him as lacking a moral core.

At the same time, Obama’s team is compiling data to defend his record, such as a Congressional Budget Office report showing that the stimulus raised employment by millions of jobs and testimony from economists that the legislation helped end the Great Recession. Democratic strategists say voters are more apt to see Romney as untrustworthy than to question the president’s leadership.

“Four years ago on Iowa caucus night, the president promised to make health care affordable and accessible for all Americans, put a middle-class tax cut in the pockets of working Americans, start to free us from our dependence on foreign oil and end the war in Iraq — promises that have been fulfilled,” said Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt. “Compare that to a candidate like Mitt Romney, who has been on both sides of every key issue and will say anything to try to hide that he was a corporate buyout specialist who bankrupted companies and fired workers and a governor with the third-worst job-creation record in the country.”

GOP officials are set to roll out new attacks in the coming days, starting Tuesday on caucus day in Iowa with a new video showing clips from Obama’s victory speech there four years ago. The RNC will buy TV ad time in select battleground-state markets within weeks.

Once a nominee is established, the strategy book will then serve as a turnkey battle plan as the campaign and RNC staff begin close coordination.

A Romney win should make for an easy transition, as the book’s primary author, Joe Pounder, a 28-year-old specialist in the political dark arts and the RNC’s research director, is a former Romney campaign aide. And Romney appears to already have adopted the same approach — often quoting Obama directly and even visiting venues where Obama spoke as a candidate or as president.

Last summer, Romney spoke at a now-shuttered Allentown, Pa., metal works factory that Obama had hailed a year earlier before it closed as a symbol of his economic success. The event was accompanied by a video, called “Obama Isn’t Working,” depicting images of the visit coupled with a year-after picture of the abandoned factory floor.

Last week, Romney spoke in Davenport, Iowa, down the street from the spot where Obama gave one of his last pre-caucus campaign speeches four years earlier.

“He closed with these words: ‘This is our moment. This is our time,’ ” Romney said. “Well, Mr. President, you have now had your moment. We have seen the results. . . . You have failed to deliver on the promises you made here in Davenport.”

Several Republican strategists said that striking the right tone in attacking Obama will be tricky, because many Americans, even if they disapprove of his job performance, still see the country’s first black president as a historic and admirable figure. Polls show that most people like him personally — making them more likely to discount traditional attack ads.

Still, party officials believe that many independent voters — more than eight in 10 of whom think the country is on the wrong track, according to a November Washington Post-ABC News poll — are ready to accept the premise that Obama didn’t work out. Officials said they settled on the plan to use the president’s own words after examining private and public polls showing that the approach resonated with swing voters nationally and in key battlegrounds.

“Because the president remains personally well liked, [the GOP strategy] is a good way to not have to swim against that tide,” said Ed Gillespie, a former RNC chairman who is in regular contact with senior party officials. “It’s his own words.”

Similar conclusions emerged from months of focus groups and polling conducted by American Crossroads, the pro-GOP group that along with its affiliate, Crossroads GPS, expects to have raised $240 million during the 2011-12 cycle. A recent ad by the group featured a mom lying awake at night recalling that she backed Obama because he “spoke so beautifully” and promised recovery but now worrying that his policies were costly and ineffective.

“We don’t bang voters upside the head with an anti-Obama message, but we appeal to their sensibility that maybe they supported him in the past, and we make it okay for them to not support him now,” said Jonathan Collegio, a Crossroads spokesman.

The RNC’s Obama book reflects a number of technology developments since the last campaign, such as video archives that are searchable by keyword. It has been collected in part by a team of staff members and interns who spend each day in a windowless room on the RNC’s ground floor, staring at a dozen flat-screen TVs and monitoring the Web.

In the past, opposition research books took the form of three-ring binders. Many of those binders, dating to the 1976 race against President Jimmy Carter and spanning to the admittedly thin 2008 text on Obama, now sit on a bookshelf in the office of Pounder, the RNC research chief writing the 2012 book. This time, the document will exist only online, complete with links to videos, government reports, transcripts and other background material.

The new book contains more than a dozen chapters, including a 73-page section titled “The Obama Economy,” and has separate chapters logging local-level campaign promises delivered during stops in places such as Cleveland, Denver and Scranton, Pa.

When Obama heads out on the campaign trail, officials will use the newly compiled quotes and data to put in place a full-scale mobilization, including videos, op-eds in local papers, calls with local media outlets and appearances by local GOP supporters, all designed to highlight the president’s past statements in each locale, said Sean Spicer, the RNC’s spokesman. Promises relating to the Hispanic community will be fed to Hispanic bloggers and media.

“He made so many promises in so many places,” Spicer said. “The goal is whenever he does an interview in Scranton, Columbus, Ames, Cleveland or wherever, that every local reporter, blogger and concerned citizen says, ‘Hey, we’re armed here with information about the last time you were here, and we want you to answer to yourself.’ ”

The strategy can be seen in several Internet ads produced by the party in recent weeks.

A video titled “Failed Promises: Scranton” was released in November to coincide with an Obama visit to the northeastern Pennsylvania city. It shows Obama speaking about jobs and the economy, his face depicted through shattered windows of an abandoned factory as job-loss stats flash across the screen.

Another RNC ad, “It’s Been Three Years,” shows Obama as a candidate saying the “real question” is whether Americans would be better off in four years. Then it shows a clip from an October ABC interview when he tells George Stephanopoulos that “I don’t think they’re better off than they were four years ago.”

The spot ends with Obama the 2008 candidate drawing roaring applause when he proclaims: “This country can’t take four more years of the same failed policies. It’s time to try something new.”

Polling analyst Scott Clement contributed to this report.

N.J.'s new congressional map gives edge to GOP

2011-12-24T16:30:00.000-05:00

N.J.'s new congressional map gives edge to GOP

December 24, 2011|By Joelle Farrell, Inquirer Staff Writer

Republicans, who lost out in New Jersey's legislative redistricting battle earlier this year, came out on top with the new congressional map revealed Friday.

A bipartisan committee charged with axing one of New Jersey's 13 congressional districts decided to push a Democratic congressman into a Republican-leaning district.

Unlike most states, New Jersey uses a committee to redraw legislative and congressional district boundaries every 10 years when the U.S. Census Bureau releases updated population figures. New Jersey grew at a slower rate than other states, so it lost one seat in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The tie-breaking 13th member of the committee, John J. Farmer Jr., chose the Republican proposal, which was approved Friday with a 7-6 committee vote in Trenton.

U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman, a liberal Democrat who represents parts of Hudson, Passaic, and Essex Counties, took the hardest hit. His hometown of Fair Lawn was merged into the Republican-leaning Fifth District represented by Rep. Scott Garrett, a Republican and the state's most conservative member of the U.S. House. The rest of Rothman's district was siphoned off to Rep. Bill Pascrell, a Democrat.

Democrats also lost a fight in South Jersey. The revised map removes Cherry Hill, a Democratic-leaning township, from the Third District represented by freshman Rep. Jon Runyan, a Republican.

Democrats on the committee scoffed at the Republican argument that Runyan's district remains competitive without Cherry Hill, which was moved to the already strongly Democratic district represented by Rep. Rob Andrews, a Democrat.

"The notion that District Three is a competitive district is frankly a work of fiction," said former Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts Jr., who led the Democrats on the board. "It is less competitive than the current district."

But Farmer, the dean of Rutgers Law School in Newark and a former state attorney general, said the map was a genuine compromise between the two parties.

"I have exasperated all my colleagues at this table in an effort to drive compromise and bring both parties together," Farmer said at Friday's hearing in Trenton.

Rothman, first elected to Congress in 1996, said he would announce his plans soon. If he does not run against Garrett, he could move to Pascrell's district (where voters already know him) and challenge Pascrell in a primary.

"I am looking at all my options as a result of the new map," he said in a statement.

Garrett could not be immediately reached for comment.

Roberts said he was not sure yet whether Democrats or other interested parties, such as minority coalitions, would challenge the map in court.

Farmer said he believed the new map was better than the previous one in almost every way. It splits only 14 municipalities between districts, and none of them more than once. The prior map split 29 municipalities, with two of them represented by three representatives.

The map also preserves two minority voting blocs and creates opportunities for minority candidates in two other districts. It does not "strain geography" to accomplish its goals, and the districts are more compact, Farmer said.

Democrats tried to delay the final vote, arguing that the public had no opportunity to review the new map, which, by state law, does not have to be adopted until Jan. 17. Several Democrats also criticized the new boundaries, saying they split some minority populations, including an Asian voting bloc in Bergen County.

"Our deadline is not today," Roberts said. "Our deadline is 31/2 weeks from today."

But Republicans said Democrats were simply stalling.

Michael DuHaime, an adviser to Gov. Christie who led the Republican committee members, said Democrats did not complain about the timeline until Friday morning, when Farmer called the commissioners to say he had chosen the GOP plan.

"I don't understand why we would not follow the process that we agreed to other than the fact that your map hasn't been selected," DuHaime said in response to Roberts.

The two maps were not so different. After sequestering themselves for a week at the Heldrich Hotel in New Brunswick, both parties offered maps Thursday that would pit Garrett against Rothman. But Democrats wanted a 50-50 voter registration divide in the combined district, according to Democrats.

Farmer, for his part, said his first inclination was to combine two Democratic districts - that of Rothman and the neighboring district represented by Pascrell, which stretches over parts of Passaic and Essex Counties.

"The Democrats changed my mind," he said. "Speaker Roberts made a compelling argument that allowing the voters to decide whose party loses a seat is fair."

But Roberts said the new map does not give Rothman a "fair fight." Garrett may have a four-point advantage if Rothman faces him next fall, Democratic sources said.

Democrats hold seven of the state's U.S. House seats, while Republicans hold six.

If Garrett defeats Rothman and the other incumbents are reelected in 2012, New Jersey would have an even six-six split in its U.S. House delegation.

The new map will remain in effect until 2021.

When the state's legislative districts were remapped in April, the tiebreaker on that committee, Alan Rosenthal, approved the Democratic map, which largely protected Democrats, who hold majorities in the both chambers in Trenton.

With help from Christie, N.J. fundraiser for GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney raises more than $1M

2011-12-12T09:35:00.000-05:00

With help from Christie, N.J. fundraiser for GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney raises more than $1M

Published: Monday, December 12, 2011, 10:14 PM Times of Trenton

By Matt Friedman/Statehouse Bureau

Fresh from his trip to Iowa to boost GOP presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s standing with Republican caucus voters, Gov. Chris Christie tonight helped fill the candidate’s campaign coffers.

The governor hosted Romney at a fundraiser Christie said took in $1.1 million for the former Massachusetts governor. Billed as the Romney campaign’s "New Jersey Kickoff Reception," the high-priced shin-dig at the Parsippany Hilton cost a minimum of $500 and drew more than 500 people.

Almost every Republican bigwig in the state showed up, sending the message that the New Jersey Republican establishment is in lock step behind Romney — and Christie, his highest profile surrogate on the campaign trail. The governor said all 21 county chairmen are endorsing Romney, as are 14 of 16 Republican state Senators and 27 of 33 GOP assembly members.

"Welcome to Morris County. Welcome to New Jersey. And New Jersey tonight is officially Mitt Romney country," Christie said.

Romney began his 14-minute speech by heaping praise on Christie. "This guy’s just amazing. The whole nation’s watching this guy," he said.

Romney then took some swipes at President Obama, saying he wants to "turn towards Europe."

"Right now as we have a choice. Do we follow Europe or do we follow America? I don’t think Europe is working in Europe. It’s not going to work here," he said. "The right answer is to believe in America and believe in the principles that made us the hope of the earth."

Christie holds fundraiser for Mitt Romney in ParsippanyNew Jersey Governor Chris Christie holds a fundraiser for U.S. Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, Monday evening at the Hilton in Parsippany. (Video by Aristide Econompoulos / The Star-Ledger)Watch video

Tonight’s fundraiser came as Romney continues to lead the pack of GOP presidential hopefuls in money, but trails former House Speaker Newt Gingrich by double digits three of four early caucus and primary states, according to polls. Christie said he expects the primary process to be a "long slog" that won’t be determined by the first few states to hold contests.

Romney has been positioning himself to outlast his rivals, even if he doesn’t have the strongest early showing.

"If I were concerned about Newt Gingrich, I’d have had to be concerned about Herman Cain, Michelle Bachmann, and Rick Perry, all of whom held similar leads to the leads speaker Gingrich holds now over Gov. Romney in various states," Christie said at a press conference earlier in the day.

Despite the showing of Garden State GOP power, the event was not about preparing for a primary showdown in New Jersey, which won’t holds its nominating contest until June. As usual, New Jersey is playing its role with money.

State Democrats hit back by pointing out a $10,000 bet Romney offered to rival Texas Gov. Rick Perry during a debate Saturday — a move critics derided as showing Romney out of touch with regular people.

"New Jersey is an ATM stop for candidates and Chris Christie is offering to open up the ATM for his friend Mitt Romney," said state Democratic Chairman John Wisniewski. "I think Romney’s trying to get enough money together to pay off that bet."

At the fundraiser, Gail Giacobbe, a retired French and Italian high school teacher from Bernardsville, called Romney’s speech "refreshing."

Gov. Chris Christie on Mitt RomneySpeaking at a press conference at Borough Hall in Paramus, Gov. Chris Christie answers questions about the timing of his endorsement of Republican Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney and criticism of Romney by some Republicans that he is not conservative enough for the presidential nomination. (Video by Brian Donohue / The Star-Ledger)Watch video

"I thought it was sincere, " she said. "You must see a candidate in person. On TV, you see another person."

Giacobbe said she wasn’t completely sure she would vote for Romney until after his speech. Christie’s endorsement helped too, she said. "I trust Gov. Christie not 100 percent, but 200 percent" she said.

Mercer County Election Results

2011-11-09T00:24:00.000-05:00

Mercer County Election Results

Last Updated: November 16, 2011 3:50 PM

Registration & Turnout

212,182 Voters

	Vote Count	Percent
Election Day Turnout	63,488	29.92%
Mail-In Ballot Turnout	4,441	2.09%
Rejected Ballots Turnout	132	0.06%
Provisional Turnout	311	0.15%
Total	68,372	32.22%

State Senate- 14th Leg Dist

97/97 100.00%

Under Votes	705
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Linda R. GREENSTEIN	15,750	53.36%
Rep - Richard J. KANKA	13,754	46.60%
Personal Choice	12	0.04%
Total	29,516	100.00%

State Senate- 15th Leg Dist

137/137 100.00%

Under Votes	852
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Shirley K. TURNER	20,211	67.66%
Rep - Donald J. COX	9,631	32.24%
Personal Choice	29	0.10%
Total	29,871	100.00%

State Senate- 16th Leg Dist

23/23 100.00%

Under Votes	364
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Maureen VELLA	4,730	69.85%
Rep - Christopher 'Kip' BATEMAN	2,035	30.05%
Personal Choice	7	0.10%
Total	6,772	100.00%

Member of General Assembly 14th District

97/97 100.00%

Under Votes	3128
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Wayne P. DeANGELO	16,679	29.16%
Dem - Daniel R. BENSON	15,958	27.90%
Rep - Wayne WITTMAN	11,735	20.52%
Rep - Sheree McGOWAN	11,993	20.97%
Grn - Steven WELZER	820	1.43%
Personal Choice	13	0.02%
Total	57,198	100.00%

Member of General Assembly 15th District

137/137 100.00%

Under Votes	3774
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Reed GUSCIORA	19,069	33.12%
Dem - Bonnie WATSON COLEMAN	19,210	33.37%
Rep - Peter M. YULL	9,597	16.67%
Rep - Kathy KILCOMMONS	9,670	16.80%
Personal Choice	22	0.04%
Total	57,568	100.00%

Member of General Assembly 16th District

23/23 100.00%

Under Votes	982
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Marie CORFIELD	4,711	35.59%
Dem - Joe CAMAROTA	4,637	35.03%
Rep - Peter J. BIONDI	1,982	14.97%
Rep - Jack M. CIATTARELLI	1,896	14.32%
Personal Choice	10	0.08%
Total	13,236	100.00%

County Executive

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	3337
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Brian M. HUGHES	42,086	64.98%
Rep - Jonathan C. SAVAGE	22,661	34.99%
Personal Choice	17	0.03%
Total	64,764	100.00%

Sheriff

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	3892
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - John A. 'Jack' KEMLER	37,997	59.26%
Rep - Richard URBANI	21,632	33.74%
Ind - Miriam MARTINEZ	4,457	6.95%
Personal Choice	31	0.05%
Total	64,117	100.00%

Surrogate

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	5059
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Diane GEROFSKY	39,019	62.04%
Rep - Lisa RICHFORD	23,850	37.92%
Personal Choice	24	0.04%
Total	62,893	100.00%

Members of Board of Chosen Freeholders

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	10440
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Lucylle R.S. WALTER	37,948	30.30%
Dem - John A. CIMINO	39,088	31.21%
Rep - Z. Dion CLARK	23,675	18.90%
Rep - David G. MAHER	24,503	19.56%
Personal Choice	31	0.02%
Total	125,245	100.00%

Board of Chosen Freeholder (unexpired term)

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	6025
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Samuel T. FRISBY, Sr.	36,834	59.55%
Rep - James V. CASTELIZE, III	24,993	40.40%
Personal Choice	31	0.05%
Total	61,858	100.00%

East Windsor Township Council

16/16 100.00%

Under Votes	1094
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Janice S. MIRONOV	3,041	17.56%
Dem - Marc LIPPMAN	2,691	15.54%
Dem - Peter V. YEAGER	2,667	15.40%
Dem - John H. ZOLLER	2,645	15.27%
Rep - Steve R. COMMER	1,490	8.60%
Rep - Robert ERTEL	1,607	9.28%
Rep - John GUARNIERE	1,623	9.37%
Rep - Thaddeus 'TJ' BERDZIK	1,548	8.94%
Personal Choice	7	0.04%
Total	17,319	100.00%

Ewing Township Council Unexpired

32/32 100.00%

Under Votes	246
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Kevin W. BAXTER	4,156	59.82%
Rep - John M. CIFELLI	2,791	40.17%
Personal Choice	1	0.01%
Total	6,948	100.00%

Hamilton Township Mayor

68/68 100.00%

Under Votes	561
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Constance Carella DALTON	7,204	33.46%
Rep - John F. BENCIVENGO	14,305	66.44%
Personal Choice	21	0.10%
Total	21,530	100.00%

Hamilton Township Council

68/68 100.00%

Under Votes	2282
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Tennille McCOY	7,685	18.38%
Dem - Daniel J. KEELAN	7,682	18.37%
Rep - Kelly YAEDE	13,388	32.02%
Rep - Kevin J. MEARA	13,048	31.20%
Personal Choice	14	0.03%
Total	41,817	100.00%

Hightstown Borough Common Council

4/4 100.00%

Under Votes	80
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Susan BLUTH	516	25.46%
Dem - Robert THIBAULT	569	28.07%
Rep - John ARCHER	469	23.14%
Rep - Skye L. GILMARTIN	466	22.99%
Personal Choice	7	0.35%
Total	2,027	100.00%

Hightstown Borough Common Council Unexp

4/4 100.00%

Under Votes	39
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Gail E. DORAN	520	51.08%
Rep - George SERRANO	496	48.72%
Personal Choice	2	0.20%
Total	1,018	100.00%

Hopewell Borough Mayor

2/2 100.00%

Under Votes	87
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Paul ANZANO	412	99.28%
Personal Choice	3	0.72%
Total	415	100.00%

Hopewell Borough Common Council

2/2 100.00%

Under Votes	422
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Rep - Charles Schuyler MOREHOUSE	292	51.14%
Rep - Robert LEWIS	275	48.16%
Personal Choice	4	0.70%
Total	571	100.00%

Hopewell Township Committee

12/12 100.00%

Under Votes	171
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Vanessa SANDOM	2,463	28.42%
Dem - Allen CANNON	2,261	26.09%
Rep - Todd BRANT	1,957	22.58%
Rep - Ashley KERR	1,982	22.87%
Personal Choice	3	0.03%
Total	8,666	100.00%

Lawrence Township Council

21/21 100.00%

Under Votes	1096
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Michael S. POWERS	3,486	21.10%
Dem - David C. MAFFEI	3,179	19.24%
Dem - Cathleen M. LEWIS	3,258	19.72%
Rep - Falk ENGEL	2,271	13.75%
Rep - Kyle COLLINS	2,176	13.17%
Rep - Colette COOLBAUGH	2,141	12.96%
Personal Choice	8	0.05%
Total	16,519	100.00%

Pennington Borough Mayor

3/3 100.00%

Under Votes	165
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Anthony J. PERSICHILLI	447	98.24%
Personal Choice	8	1.76%
Total	455	100.00%

Pennington Borough Common Council

3/3 100.00%

Under Votes	361
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Glen GRIFFITHS	436	49.83%
Dem - Edwin Weed TUCKER	432	49.37%
Personal Choice	7	0.80%
Total	875	100.00%

Pennington Boro Common Council Unexpired

3/3 100.00%

Under Votes	37
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Dina DUNN	367	62.31%
Rep - Eva L. KAPLAN	222	37.69%
Personal Choice	0	0.00%
Total	589	100.00%

Princeton Borough Mayor

9/9 100.00%

Under Votes	90
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Yina MOORE	1,228	51.92%
Rep - Jill JACHERA	1,127	47.65%
Personal Choice	10	0.42%
Total	2,365	100.00%

Princeton Borough Common Council

9/9 100.00%

Under Votes	353
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Heather HOWARD	1,583	35.29%
Dem - Barbara TRELSTAD	1,533	34.17%
Rep - Peter A. MARKS	645	14.38%
Rep - Dudley G. SIPPRELLE	658	14.67%
Ind - Robert RAPHAEL	62	1.38%
Personal Choice	5	0.11%
Total	4,486	100.00%

Princeton Township Committee

14/14 100.00%

Under Votes	564
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
Dem - Bernard 'Bernie' P. MILLER	3,039	34.48%
Dem - G. Susan 'Sue' NEMETH	2,983	33.84%
Rep - Geoff ATON	1,393	15.80%
Rep - Mark SCHEIBNER	1,394	15.82%
Personal Choice	5	0.06%
Total	8,814	100.00%

West Windsor Township Council

16/16 100.00%

Under Votes	1291
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
- Bryan MAHER	2,063	16.84%
- Lauren KOHN	1,722	14.06%
- Gary ZOHN	1,985	16.20%
- George BOREK	2,071	16.90%
- Lindsay P. DIEHL	2,043	16.68%
- Kristina SAMONTE	2,057	16.79%
Personal Choice	310	2.53%
Total	12,251	100.00%

STATE PUBLIC QUESTION

257/257 100.00%

Under Votes	15269
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
- Yes	32,893	62.60%
- No	19,651	37.40%
Total	52,544	100.00%

PRINCETON BOROUGH QUESTION

9/9 100.00%

Under Votes	133
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
- For Consolidation	1,413	61.22%
- Against Consolidation	895	38.78%
Total	2,308	100.00%

PRINCETON TOWNSHIP QUESTION

14/14 100.00%

Under Votes	126
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
- For Consolidation	3,901	85.36%
- Against Consolidation	669	14.64%
Total	4,570	100.00%

ROBBINSVILLE TOWNSHIP QUESTION

9/9 100.00%

Under Votes	287
Over Votes	0

	Vote Count	Percent
- Yes	1,917	87.98%
- No	262	12.02%
Total	2,179	100.00%

Support Our Slate on November 8th!

2011-11-07T13:28:00.003-05:00

Support Our Entire Slate of Women This November 8th!

14 District

Sheree McGowan for Assembly

15 District

Kathleen Kilcommons for Assembly

Mercer County

Lisa Richford, Esq. for Surrogate

Hamilton

Kelly Yaede for Council

Hightstown

Skye Gilmartin for Council

Princeton Borough

Jill Jachera for Mayor

Lawerence

Colette Coolbaugh for Council

Hopewell Township

Ashley Kerr for Committee

Pennington Borough

Eva Kaplan for Council

West Windsor Township

Lauren Kohen for Council

The Princeton Packet endorses Jill Jachera for Mayor

2011-11-02T13:27:00.000-05:00

**The Princeton Packet endorses Jill Jachera for Mayor**

November 1, 2011

Princeton Borough has an opportunity next week to elect a mayor who will lead the town through some challenging times.

Should consolidation pass, the mayor will be the one to guide the borough into unity with the township. Should it fail, the mayor will have to heal the wounds and move on.

Jill Jachera has the skills, intelligence, experience and leadership abilities to best get the job done.

When speaking with her about the issues or asking about her plans for the borough's future, her answers are thoughtful, structured, clear and concise.

A lawyer by profession, her training would be helpful in dealing with the needs of the town. She would be focused on how to accomplish what must be done if there is a transition of governments. Her background would make her function as a strong advocate for the residents and their needs.

During two sessions to discuss the issues here at the Packet with her opponent, Yina Moore, Ms. Jachera's answers demonstrated her grasp of what needs to be done. She proved she is able to present herself well and think on her feet.

She was frustrated by the lack of public debates and so were we. It is hard to believe that her opponent could not have found the time to debate had she so desired.

We think Ms. Jachera would bring a fresh approach and new energy to the office of mayor.

While relatively new to politics, that is not a negative. She would come into office very much free of the political baggage that is so prevalent in the borough. She is not an insider. Her allegiance would be to the people.

We also know where she stands on the issues, particularly on consolidation, which she has clearly stated she supports.

We find her opponent's unwillingness to take a public position on what is the most important issue on the ballot to be a serious flaw in leadership, accountability, transparency and judgment.

Although her opponent is a graduate of Princeton, Ms Jachera has made improving relations and communications with the university a priority, which is something that needs to be done.While she is running as a Republican in a very much Democrat community, Ms. Jachera has shown she can work with people of either party. Indeed, she says it was Democrats who convinced her to run.

When it comes to a community the size of Princeton Borough, party politics simply should not be the deciding factor. Party politics is what is wrong with government from Washington to Trenton.

It doesn't belong where the issues are local. What difference does it make if the person who is representing the residents' needs of public safety, taxes, public services and recreation votes blue or red on national or state issues?

We think Jill Jachera is the best choice to be mayor for all of the residents of the borough and will breathe new life into the office.

Mercer executive debate gets personal as Hughes looks to fend off aggressive Savage

2011-10-27T15:14:00.001-05:00

Mercer executive debate gets personal as

Hughes looks to fend off aggressive Savage

Politickernj.com

By Max Pizarro | October 26th, 2011 - 11:22am

Deprived of a hard-charging mayoral race in Hamilton, the contest for Mercer County executive has showered Mercer political junkies in a welcome two-debate bloodbath.

The pair of forums now - one last week and one yesterday - have underscored the ill-will between incumbent Democrat Brian Hughes and his challenger, Republican businessman Jonathan Savage.

First elected in 2003 and with money and demographic advantages, Hughes seeks his third term in the Mercer power chair against an aggressive opponent.

Savage last week squeezed an anti-government atmosphere into an attack on what the challenger sees as Hughes's genteel political beginnings. At that first forum, the Republican closed with an encapsulation of his own background as a proud product of the middle class.

Savage said he was a normal guy, and wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth and is not ashamed of anything he has done in his past.

People in the audience interpreted the last remark as a flashback to a 1991 critique of Hughes made by the allies and backers of U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-4), who harped on Hughes's troubles with drugs.

When the debate ended and Savage crossed to shake the county executive's hand, Hughes gave him a close-quarters expletive.

"I've been talking about my sobriety for years," Hughes told PolitickerNJ.com. "My past is not a secret, but it is the past and there is always some (one) who wants to bring it up. As for my father (the late Gov. Richard J. Hughes) - my father with ten kids at home in his last year as governor was making 60 grand a year. That is not being born with a silver spoon in your mouth."

Hughes said the negativity is unfortunately part of the game, even though he said Savage had promised to run a positive campaign.

But Savage's allies insist they're beating the incumbent on issues. Following their televised debate yesterday, the Republicans emphasized a Savage victory owing to his public and private sector experience in job creation, economic development and "sound management of public funds.."

"Incumbent Hughes again offered excuses for the negative financial and employment outlook after 8 years in power, while the energized Savage countered that the county tax bill has been increased 35%," said Savage Campaign Manager Philip Robbins.

Hughes said the county tax rate has gone down from 57 cents to 48 cents.

"We have been able to increase our surplus amount," said the Democrat. "We have collapsed a lot of unused county debt, and we're ten percent leaner than eight years ago, which comes from the sale of our geriatric center and shared service with the Middlesex County of the youth detention center."

The GOP stayed aggressive.

"When asked why the county tax rate is significantly higher than the municipal tax rate, incumbent Hughes offered excuses while generally acknowledging that Mercer County should regionalize more services," said Robbins. "Savage put forward concrete, specific proposals for high-efficiency, cost-saving, shared services including the consolidation of municipal health departments, tax offices and trash collection under County auspices. Savage identified the sale of non-performing county property including the arena, airport and ballpark as a means to shed debt, reduce ongoing expenses and to prime the pump of private sector investment and job creation."

Hughes said it's all generalities from the other side and counts on his own combined record - including assisting the creation of new solar projects, the reception of Capital Health in Hopewell and construction of a new courthouse - with his retail brand of campaigning.

"We had a joint appearance before firefighters and he sent a surrogate speaker because he was playing guitar at a Republican fundraiser," Hughes said of Savage

http://savageformercer.com/

Top spots up for grabs in Princeton Borough

2011-10-24T10:00:00.003-05:00

Top spots up for grabs in Princeton Borough

October 23, 2011 Times of Trenton Joshua Rosenau

PRINCETON BOROUGH - Along with weighing in on the question of consolidating the borough and Princeton Township, voters in November will pick a new mayor and decide who will fill two open seats on the borough's council.
The two candidates in the race for mayor are Republican Jill Jachera and Democrat Yina Moore.
A former employment attorney with 23 years' experience, Jachera works as a consultant for Morgan Lewis Resources in Philadelphia on issues of workplace diversity, sexual harassment and performance management.
Moore also worked as a consultant after serving as a development administrator for the Central Artery/Tunnel Project in Boston, commonly called "The Big Dig." She is now a community activist.
About the hot topic of consolidation, Jachera said, "Like anything, consolidation has pros and cons.
However, when I think about the efficiencies that can be gained, the savings, and the increase in services as it relates to police and 911, I have decided -- given the recent assurances from the township that they will use a zero-based budget to build the new budget -- that I would be voting for consolidation."
Moore declined to be interviewed, but submitted a statement saying, "In a representative democracy, where our elected officials represent the public interest, I will not tell citizens how they should vote on the issue of consolidation.
"In a referendum, each citizen has a responsibility to review all of the facts and fully participate in the process by making his or her own decision. As mayor, I will utilize my professional and civic experiences in carrying out the decision in the interest of the citizens of the Borough."

COUNCIL CONTESTS

In the race for two contested seats for borough council, incumbent Barbara Trelstad will appear on the Democratic ticket with Heather Howard, former commissioner of the state Department of Health and Senior Services.Republicans Dudley Sipprelle and Peter Marks are set to challenge the Democrats in the race, along with Robert Raphael, who said the "green tea party" will be listed on the ballot next to his name.
Trelstad, a 30-year resident of the borough, served on several local boards before winning a council seat six years ago.
"I have a lot of experience I think assists me in how I look at problems," Trelstad said. She did not address the issue of consolidation.
Howard, who works as a lecturer and program director at the Woodrow Wilson School for Public Policy at Princeton University, also touted her experience working in government.
"I have managed a staff of 1,700 and a budget of $3.5 billion. I hope that experience can help me bring a fresh perspective and make Princeton Borough a more efficient government for the people, for the taxpayers," she said.
Howard supports the plan to consolidate the borough and the township into a single municipality called Princeton.

Martin Griff / The Times of Trenton Battle of Princeton monument and Princeton Borough Hall, Princeton Borough, NJ. Thursday, April 7. 2011.

"I think it's a chance to provide tax relief and better government to the residents, to the taxpayers," she said.
Marks and Sipprelle disagree.
"I would prefer the borough remain primarily a single-family municipality with a defined retail district, which is Nassau Street and parts of Witherspoon Street," said Marks, a real estate developer, who worked in public finance for the cities of Cleveland and Toledo, Ohio, before starting his own business in 1990.
Sipprelle is a retired diplomat who served the U.S. Department of State in Turkey, Italy, Austria, Sweden, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Venezuela and Colombia before settling in the borough in 2005.
Sipprelle said consolidation is a way for the borough to avoid addressing its financial problems.
"What they are doing is kicking the can down the road by consolidating," Sipprelle said.
Sipprell also said the latest consolidation plan would disenfranchise people in the borough, and he could not support it.
Raphael, the independent candidate for council, said he, too, is against consolidation.
A retired art professor who has lived in the borough for the last 35 years, Raphael said he is running solely in the interest of residents, not party.
"I am against the sameness between the Democrats in Princeton and the Republicans. I am not happy with the vagueness that comes with whatever a Republican or a Democrat is," he said.

New Jersey (NJ) State Ballot Question 2011

2011-10-21T19:20:00.001-05:00

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO APPEAR ON THE

NOVEMBER 8, 2011 GENERAL ELECTION BALLOT

THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS ANALYSIS

QUESTION
Constitutional Amendment Authorizing Legislature by Law to Allow Wagering on Sports Events at Atlantic City Casinos and At Horse Racetracks Shall the amendment to Article IV, Section VII, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the State of New Jersey, agreed to by the Legislature, providing that it shall be lawful for the Legislature to authorize by law wagering at casinos or gambling houses in Atlantic City and at current or former running and harness horse racetracks on the results of professional, certain college, or amateur
sport or athletic events, be approved?

Interpretive Statement (Official explanation by the state)
A “Yes” vote on this question would allow the Legislature, when permitted by federal law, to legalize
the placing of bets on certain sports events at casinos, racetracks, and former racetrack sites. Currently,
federal law only permits this type of betting in Nevada and Delaware. It also occurs through illegal
betting operations. If legalized in New Jersey, bets could be placed on professional, college, or amateur
sports or athletic events, except that bets could not be placed on any college sports or athletic event that
takes place in New Jersey or in which a New Jersey college team is playing. Thus, if approved, this constitutional amendment will expand allowable gambling in the New Jersey Constitution so that if the federal ban is reversed -- either by Congress or the courts -- the New Jersey Legislature could introduce legislation to permit sports betting.

SUMMARY
In order for New Jersey to have sports betting, the following steps need to be taken:
One is to change the New Jersey Constitution to grant the Legislature the authority to allow such betting,
which is what this amendment would do. However, there is currently a federal ban on sports gambling
in New Jersey. So the second step would be to overturn that ban. This amendment does not change
federal law and it is not certain whether the ban can be overturned. If the ban is in fact overturned, the
legislature would then have to pass a law to actually allow the sports betting. This amendment merely
gives them the option to do so.

Thus, if approved, this constitutional amendment will expand allowable gambling in the New Jersey
Constitution so that if the federal ban is reversed -- either by Congress or the courts -- the New Jersey
Legislature could introduce legislation to permit sports betting.

BACKGROUND
The federal Professional and Amateur Sports Protection Act of 1992 (PASPA) prohibits sports betting in
all states except for Nevada, Delaware, Montana and Oregon, which had existing sports betting
authorization in place when the law was adopted. The law provided a one year grace period after its
passage, during which other states could elect to institute their own exempt sports betting schemes. New
Jersey did not act within the one year window established by the law.

Nevertheless, in 2010 the current Legislature authorized this current ballot question. State Senator
Raymond Lesniak, prime sponsor of the ballot question, joined with the New Jersey Thoroughbred
Horseman's Association, the Thoroughbred Breeders Association of New Jersey and Interactive Media
Entertainment & Gaming Association to challenge PASPA in federal court, claiming the law was
unconstitutional on various grounds. The New Jersey Senate also joined the suit in February 2011, after
the Legislature authorized placing this question on the ballot. In March 2011, the suit was dismissed by
the court, which found that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the suit. The court noted that sports
gambling is illegal in New Jersey, hence there is no imminent threat that anyone will seek to enforce
PASPA against the state.

If the voters approve this ballot question, and if the federal prohibition is reversed, the Legislature could
then adopt specific legislation permitting sports betting at Atlantic City casinos and current or former
racetracks in accordance with the limitations set forth in the proposed constitutional amendment.

Reasons to Vote YES:
· If the amendment is approved, the federal courts may allow a challenge to PASPA to go forward.
· Supporters argue that sports betting is already widespread, and legalizing it will allow for state regulation and reduce crime.
· Estimates of the tax revenue that could be generated by legalization of sports betting range from $30.6m to $220.7m, depending on the number of locations and whether or not internet wagers are permitted.

Reasons to Vote NO:
· Expansions of gambling have historically increased the number of participants; as 2% to 5% of
gamblers become problem gamblers, the legitimization of sports betting may increase the number of problem
gamblers in New Jersey, currently estimated at 300,000 to 350,000.
· It is unclear exactly where sports betting would be allowed, as the amendment does not define the term
"former racetracks.” For instance, most county fairgrounds were sites of horse racing in the past.

PRINCETON: Jachera demands apology over Moore song lyrics

2011-10-21T18:56:00.004-05:00

PRINCETON: Jachera demands apology over Moore song lyrics

DATE POSTED: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 Princeton Packet

By Victoria Hurely-Schubert, Staff Writer

The gloves came off in the borough mayoral race on Sunday night when Democratic candidate Yina Moore sang a parody of “I Will Survive” that was critical of Republican challenger Jill Jachera at a Princeton Community Democratic Organization (PCDO) candidate’s night.

   The song, which Ms. Moore said was all in fun for entertainment, portrayed Ms. Jachera as someone from outer space with a drab look on her face who does wrong by children and tries to hurt her neighbors.

   Ms. Moore was asked about her performance at an editorial board meeting of the staff of the Princeton Packet on Tuesday afternoon by Packet editor Calhoun J. Killeen Jr.

   ”It was the words of the song,” said Ms. Moore. “I read them in (Monday’s) paper and they weren’t quite that ... this was in a moment of jest that was to be part of our candidates night to bring some form of entertainment to our gathering.”

   She insists the performance was not meant to be public and the event was a meeting of the membership.

   ”That was the only intended ear for any of this,” said Ms. Moore.

   The PCDO website lists the event as a membership meeting, but does invite the public. “The general public is invited and encouraged to attend,” was posted on the listing.

   ”I am disappointed, I am not surprised, especially given the previous letter (to the editor from Borough Council member Jenny Crumiller) and the attitude that has been taken about my candidacy,” said Ms. Jachera, after reading the lyrics for the first time in Packet offices Tuesday afternoon. “I’m not surprised in the sense that its not uncommon in politics when someone doesn’t have a legitimate criticism against your candidacy. They often resort to this type of cruel, petty, divisive and inaccurate tactic.”

   When pressed about specific verses, such as “I spent so many nights thinking how you did my children wrong” and “back from outer space,” Ms Moore justified them as the “absolute words to the song ‘I Will Survive.’”

   Calling it an “insider song,” Mr. Killeen said “it sounded negative.”

   Ms. Moore went on to explain that the “how you did my children wrong” phrase was based on a recounting of a neighbor issue her stepson had playing golf in the backyard. There was no further explanation.

   The “you tried to hurt your neighbors section” stems from neighbors who Ms. Moore said talked to her about a suit that was pending from the Jachera household regarding a historic designation.

   ”I have never filed a lawsuit against any of my neighbors,” said Ms. Jachera, who asked Ms. Moore where she got the information. “I never planned to sue anyone.”

   Ms. Moore did not divulge her source, attributing “their organizational structure. I’m not sure who that is, but they have a group that was pursuing historic designation that’s the hurt that they reported or told me about.”

   ”This is extremely unbecoming in what I would think a leader in our community would be,” said Ms. Jachera. “Our community right now has serious issues ... we need someone who is going to build consensus and I have been working hard to do that in my candidacy. I take this very seriously. For someone to do this and make a mockery of this process and call it a joke; there are laws we have in this state against bullying because kids think it’s funny to joke with other kids and say mean things.”

   ”It’s always easier to be mean and that’s the tactic Ms. Moore has chosen to take,” said Ms. Jachera.

   Ms. Jachera demanded an apology, which Ms. Moore did not provide.

   ”I do regret it has come to light to seem to be critical of you as a whole,” said Ms. Moore. “It was meant as pure fun in a setting as I understood it was not a public meeting, it was internal candidates to PCDO membership, but I understand your perspective.”

   Ms. Moore said she did have a serious component at the candidates night and that she spoke about the book “The Speech” by U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders.

   Further defending herself, Ms. Jachera asked Ms. Moore if her thinking that it was a private event made her actions acceptible.

   ”There were state-elected officials, county elected officials and candidates that were there and the other candidates chose to pick serious books or songs that spoke about what it meant to them to be running for public office,” she said. “There’s nothing funny about this and the fact that it was done in private doesn’t make it any better. It’s really inexcusable”

   The following are the lyrics of the song as taken from an audio recording. Some words were not discernible.

   ”First I was afraid, I was petrified kept thinking I could never live in this town with you next door, but I spent so many nights thinking how you did my children wrong, I grew strong, I learned how to carry on.

   And so Jill, you’re back from outer space. You just walked up here with that drab look on your face; I should have changed the stupid lock to the castle gates. I should have made you leave your key to the other Hodge Road house you lived on anyway if I had known for just one second you’d be back to bother us.

   Go on now, go on walk out the door, just turn around and leave town now because you’re not welcome anymore.

   Weren’t you the one who tried to hurt all your neighbors and ... you’d think they’d lay down and die, oh no, not the Western section, the folks on Hodge, Library ... as long as we know how to love Princeton will stay alive, we’ve got all of time to live, all our love to give and we’ll survive. We’ll survive.”

Mercer County Executive, Freeholder Candidates to Take Part in Debate Tonight at Princeton University

2011-10-20T06:30:00.000-05:00

Mercer County Executive, Freeholder Candidates to Take Part in Debate Tonight at Princeton University

October20, 2011

The Mercer County candidate forum to be held at 7 o'clock tonight (Oct. 20) is being co-sponsored by the Leagues of Women Voters of the Princeton Area, Lawrence Township, Hopewell Valley, and East Windsor/Hightstown

On Thursday, Oct. 20, Republican and Democratic candidates for Mercer County Executive and Freeholder will debate and answer questions from the audience at a public forum on the campus of Princeton University.
The event is free and open to the public.
The debate will begin at 7 p.m. at Dodds Auditorium in the Woodrow Wilson School at Robertson Hall, located at the corner of Washington Road and Prospect Avenue in Princeton Borough.
Princeton University Parking Lot #10 and Parking Lot #13, both of which have entrances off William Street, will be available for the event. On-street parking is also available on Prospect Avenue and William Street
The event is co-sponsored by the Leagues of Women Voters of the Princeton Area, Lawrence Township, Hopewell Valley, and East Windsor/Hightstown.
Candidates participating are County Executive Brian Hughes, a Democrat, and Republican challenger Jonathan Savage.
Other confirmed participants include Republicans Z. Dion Clark and David G. Maher, who are running for two three-year terms as freeholder, challenging Democratic incumbents Lucylle R. S. Walter and John A. Cimino.
Samuel T. Frisby Sr., a Democrat, and Republican James V. Castelize III are vying for a one-year unexpired term on the seven-member freeholder board.
Sandy Matsen, former LWV-NJ president and a member of the Hunterdon County League of Women Voters, will moderate.
The forum will be recorded by Princeton Community TV and available for viewing online after the event at www.princetontv.org/
For further information please call the League of Women Voters at 1-800-792-VOTE.

Candidates vie for 3 spots on West Windsor Council

2011-10-09T19:53:00.002-05:00

Candidates vie for 3 spots on West Windsor Council

10.9.11 Times of Trenton/Samantha Costa

WEST WINDSOR — Seven candidates, including incumbent George Borek, are running for three open spots on the nonpartisan township council in the Nov. 8 election.

Current council members Charles Morgan and Diane Ciccone are not seeking re-election.

Borek joins newcomers Lindsay Diehl and Kristina Samonte on the “West Windsor Moving Forward” team.

“Certainly, things have changed in the past four years,” said Borek, who is seeking his second term on the council.

“Whether it be with the township, the economy, the census, we’ve had more people move in. I’ve certainly got a much broader understanding of the issues in the township.”

Borek, 51, is a 10-year resident of West Windsor. His priorities are working with the administration to address redevelopment and working on property tax issues.

Diehl, 57, was born in Panama and grew up in several cities in Central and South America. She attended Tulane University in New Orleans and moved to West Windsor 22 years ago for its school system. Diehl said the West Windsor community provided support to her and her two sons who are now grown and live out of state.

“I’m interested in giving back to the community,” Diehl said.

She’s a volunteer for the township’s Affordable Housing Committee and the mayor’s Public Advisory Communications Group. Diehl has had 26 years’ experience in market research, and her priority is seeing that West Windsor becomes “more attractive.”

Samonte, 40, has lived in West Windsor five years. She’s actively involved with the West Windsor Public Advisory Committee, West Windsor Municipal Democratic Committee, and her son’s recreational soccer team. She also has more than 15 years of professional experience in public policy and communications at the federal, state and local level.

“One of the priorities I’d like to see is to try for more economic development for West Windsor, working with private and public partnerships to attract and retain businesses for West Windsor. By doing that, you increase your local tax base,” she said.

Samonte said she’d like to see community and recreation opportunities for residents of all ages.

Gary Zohn

Bryan Maher

Lauren Kohn

Lauren Kohn, Bryan Maher and Gary Zohn are seeking seats on the council under the slogan, “Strong Leaders for West Windsor.”

Kohn, 27, a five-year resident, has a degree in English from the University of Texas at Austin. She has three children and owns Software Advisers, a financial software advising company, in West Windsor with her husband.

“Should I have the chance — flooding and traffic congestion in the train station area must be addressed,” she said.

Kohn promises to work with the county to make Route 571 an attractive and accessible downtown area.

Maher, 45, a Wall Street analyst, has lived in West Windsor 15 years. He holds an undergrad degree in finance from Clemson University and a master’s degree in entrepreneurship and strategic management from Georgia State.

“I think that our team brings financial acumen to be able to scrutinize the budget in a manner where we can start to curtail the excessive increases in our taxation. We’re not promising taxes are going to go down,” Maher said.

Zohn, 50, holds marketing and education degrees from Temple University and works as a floor broker on NYSE Euronext at Hamilton Executions LLC.

Zohn said his priorities are controlling taxes and spending and creating transparency among the administration, the council and the township residents. He’s also behind a redevelopment of Route 571, and said the proposed transit village “has taken away from that.”

Running solo against both teams, Gregory Harris is calling his campaign, “An Independent Voice of Reason.” Harris, 45, did not receive enough nominations to be placed on the Nov. 8 ballot, but he will be a write-in candidate.

The 12-year resident has three children at West Windsor-Plainsboro High School South. He owns Zydor Labs, an internet startup in West Windsor.

“I need to inform my neighbors and my friends and be their voice (on the council),” Harris said. “I can bring an even, unbiased uninfluenced voice,” Harris said.

His priority is improving transparency and communication between council and the residents of West Windsor.

Contact Samantha Costa at (609) 989-5680 or scosta@njtimes.com.

Three Women Share Nobel Peace Prize

2011-10-08T16:04:00.004-05:00

Three Women Share Nobel Peace Prize

By JEANNE WHALEN, PAUL SONNE and HAKIM ALMASMARI

WSJ 10/8/11

Three women in Africa and the Middle East were named winners of the 2011 Nobel Peace Prize, an award that recognized the Arab Spring with a pointed emphasis on women's rights in the region.

Enlarge Image

Reuters

Nobel Peace Prize winner Tawakkul Karman

The prize was given to Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Liberian activist Leymah Gbowee and Yemeni rights campaigner Tawakkul Karman. The Norwegian Nobel Committee recognized them for their "non-violent struggle for the safety of women and for women's rights to full participation in peace-building work."

The committee described Ms. Johnson Sirleaf, a Harvard-educated economist who has worked as a vice president of Citibank, as "Africa's first democratically elected female president," who has "contributed to securing peace in Liberia, to promoting economic and social development, and to strengthening the position of women."

Enlarge Image

Reuters

Nobel Peace Prize winner Leymah Gbowee

Ms. Gbowee "mobilized and organized women across ethnic and religious dividing lines to bring an end to the long war in Liberia," the committee said, while Ms. Karman, "both before and during the 'Arab Spring'….has played a leading part in the struggle for women's rights and for democracy and peace in Yemen."

The awards are noteworthy because only one of the women, Ms. Karman, is directly connected to the popular uprisings known as the Arab Spring that have toppled authoritarian regimes in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya and are still challenging hardliners in Syria and Yemen.

Enlarge Image

Agence France-Presse/Getty Images

Liberia's President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf

In announcing the award in Oslo, Norway, the head of the Norwegian committee, Thorbjørn Jagland, said the Nobel committee wanted to stress the role of women, and demonstrate that the Arab Spring was seeded years before it exploded into public view.

Mr. Jagland said the committee has "included the Arab Spring in this prize but we have put it in a particular context. If one fails to include the women in the new democracies, there will be no democracy." He added that the committee wanted to award the prize to someone whose work predated the movement, who was active "long before the world's media was there reporting."

At the same time, Mr. Jagland said the committee found it difficult to identify a single leader from the many activists and bloggers who played a role in 2011's uprisings. Among the other Arab Spring activists who had been tipped as possible winners were Google executive Wael Ghonim, who helped lead the protests on Cairo's Tahrir Square, and Tunisian blogger Lina Ben Mhenni.

Ms. Karman, leader of the Yemeni group Women Journalists Without Chains, has been a force behind the Arab Spring uprising in Yemen. She has been one of the most vocal protesters calling for the removal of Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who is still in power after surviving an assassination attempt in June. Ms. Karman's brief arrest in January for her participation in the protests helped ignite public outrage and bring more people to the streets.

The 2011 Nobel Prizes

View Interactive

From left to right: Liberian President Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Liberian peace activist Leymah Gbowee democratic activist Tawakkul Karman.

In a phone interview with The Wall Street Journal on Friday, Ms. Karman called the prize "a victory for the entire Yemeni revolution" and expressed hope that it would bring "more international support" to Yemeni protesters, who have faced a brutal crackdown that has left many dead.

"The Yemeni revolution should not be ignored and the prize will only have value if the revolution in Yemen prevails," Ms. Karman said.

The Nobel committee stressed that Ms. Karman's campaigning work began long before the Arab Spring. The 32-year old mother of three studied psychology at Yemen's Sana'a University, where she was politically active.

Later, she founded Women Journalists Without Chains, which in recent years has secured the release of tens of journalists who were jailed for their writings. She was born in Yemen's Taiz province to a middle-class family. Her father served as the Minister of Legal Affairs in the 1990s.

Ms. Johnson Sirleaf, 72, became Liberian president in 2006, after serving as Assistant United Nations Secretary General and as a vice president at Citibank. Nicknamed the "Iron Lady" by her supporters, she has pledged to rebuild the West African nation after a long period of civil war that ended in 2003.

Upon taking office, she requested the extradition of Charles Taylor, the Liberian president from 1997 to 2003 and a former warlord who had been hiding in Nigeria after being accused of war crimes. Nigeria complied with Ms. Johnson Sirleaf's request and extradited Mr. Taylor back to Liberia. Later, he was sent to a U.N.-backed court at The Hague to stand trial.

"You know, when we started off, we inherited a pretty bad situation, a broken country, collapsed economy," Ms. Johnson Sirleaf said in a May 2010 interview at the Council on Foreign Relations. She has led a fight against corruption in Liberia and taken steps to revitalize the economy and deal with Liberia's debt.

The Nobel Peace Prize announcement and biographical details
From 2007: Lift Liberia's Debt Burden
By Ellen Johnson Sirleaf and Paul Wolfowitz

Past Winners

Here are past recent winners of the Nobel Peace Prize, with links to the WSJ coverage at the time.

During the May 2010 interview, Ms. Johnson Sirleaf emphasized the importance of female leadership. "If I could have found them, I would have made an all-woman cabinet," she said, half jokingly. "But I didn't find enough of them, and we didn't have the time to wait."

Ms. Gbowee is a social worker by profession and the executive director of Women Peace and Security Network Africa, or Wipsen, a nonprofit group based in Accra, Ghana. She holds a master's degree in conflict transformation from Eastern Mennonite University in Harrisonburg, Va., according to the Wipsen website.

In a speech at the Oslo Freedom Forum in Norway earlier this year, Ms. Gbowee said: "To our sisters in Tunisia, Egypt and all of the countries that have just seen some of the greatest revolutions of the people's power, don't think that the people's power is going to translate into women's power."

"You have to step up, keep involved, keep protesting, start your own protests in the Tahrir Squares and all of the different places—because the men unfortunately that you join side by side to protest with will beat you down if you don't stand up," she said.

A mother of five, Ms. Gbowee is one of the main activists featured in "Pray the Devil Back to Hell," a 2008 documentary about a peaceful protest movement that a group of Liberian women launched to help end the civil war that had brought havoc to their country for years.

The women—dressed entirely in white—held protests, wrote letters to the international community and issued press releases. In 2003, they traveled to peace talks being held in Accra and at one point blocked the doors of the venue to force negotiators to reach an agreement.

"The security forces came and said they were arresting me," Ms. Gbowee recalled during the speech in Oslo. "I told them: 'I'll make it very easy for you, I'll strip naked.' They left me immediately."

Video: Gov Chris Christie's full speech at the Reagan Library

2011-09-28T11:58:00.000-05:00

Video: Gov Chris Christie's full speech at the Reagan Library

(Video courtesy of the Reagan Library) http://www.reaganfoundation.org/

Full Text of Governor Chris Christie's Speech at the Ronald Reagan Library: "Real American Exceptionalism"

2011-09-28T11:05:00.004-05:00

Full Text of Governor Chris Christie's Speech at the Ronald Reagan Library:
"Real American Exceptionalism"

Mrs. Reagan, distinguished guests. It is an honor for me to be here at the Reagan Library to speak to you today. I want to thank Mrs. Reagan for her gracious invitation. I am thrilled to be here.
Ronald Reagan believed in this country. He embodied the strength, perseverance and faith that has propelled immigrants for centuries to embark on dangerous journeys to come here, to give up all that was familiar for all that was possible.
He judged that as good as things were and had been for many Americans, they could and would be better for more Americans in the future.
It is this vision for our country that guided his administration over the course of eight years. His commitment to making America stronger, better and more resilient is what allowed him the freedom to challenge conventional wisdom, reach across party lines and dare to put results ahead of political opportunism.
Everybody in this room and in countless other rooms across this great country has his or her favorite Reagan story. For me, that story happened thirty years ago, in August 1981. The air traffic controllers, in violation of their contracts, went on strike. President Reagan ordered them back to work, making clear that those who refused would be fired. In the end, thousands refused, and thousands were fired.
I cite this incident not as a parable of labor relations but as a parable of principle. Ronald Reagan was a man who said what he meant and meant what he said. Those who thought he was bluffing were sadly mistaken. Reagan’s demand was not an empty political play; it was leadership, pure and simple.
Reagan said it best himself, “I think it convinced people who might have thought otherwise that I meant what I said. Incidentally, I would have been just as forceful if I thought management had been wrong in the dispute.”
I recall this pivotal moment for another reason as well. Most Americans at the time and since no doubt viewed Reagan’s firm handling of the PATCO strike as a domestic matter, a confrontation between the president and a public sector union. But this misses a critical point.
To quote a phrase from another American moment, the whole world was watching. Thanks to newspapers and television – and increasingly the Internet and social media – what happens here doesn’t stay here.
Another way of saying what I have just described is that Americans do not have the luxury of thinking that what we have long viewed as purely domestic matters have no consequences beyond our borders. To the contrary. What we say and what we do here at home affects how others see us and in turn affects what it is they say and do.
America’s role and significance in the world is defined, first and foremost, by who we are at home. It is defined by how we conduct ourselves with each other. It is defined by how we deal with our own problems. It is determined in large measure by how we set an example for the world.
We tend to still understand foreign policy as something designed by officials in the State Department and carried out by ambassadors and others overseas. And to some extent it is. But one of the most powerful forms of foreign policy is the example we set.
This is where it is instructive to harken back to Ronald Reagan and the PATCO affair. President Reagan’s willingness to articulate a determined stand and then carry it out at home sent the signal that the occupant of the Oval Office was someone who could be predicted to stand by his friends and stand up to his adversaries.
If President Reagan would do that at home, leaders around the world realized that he would do it abroad as well. Principle would not stop at the water’s edge. The Reagan who challenged Soviet aggression, or who attacked a Libya that supported terror was the same Reagan who stood up years before to PATCO at home for what he believed was right.
All this should and does have meaning for us today. The image of the United States around the world is not what it was, it is not what it can be and it is not what it needs to be. This country pays a price whenever our economy fails to deliver rising living standards to our citizens–which is exactly what has been the case for years now.
We pay a price when our political system cannot come together and agree on the difficult but necessary steps to rein in entitlement spending or reform our tax system.
We pay a price when special interests win out over the collective national interest. We are seeing just this in the partisan divide that has so far made it impossible to reduce our staggering deficits and to create an environment in which there is more job creation than job destruction.
This is where the contrast between what has happened in New Jersey and what is happening in Washington, DC is the most clear.
In New Jersey over the last 20 months, you have actually seen divided government that is working. To be clear, it does not mean that we have no argument or acrimony. There are serious disagreements, sometimes expressed loudly—Jersey style.
Here is what we did. We identified the problems. We proposed specific means to fix them. We educated the public on the dire consequences of inaction. And we compromised, on a bi-partisan basis, to get results. We took action.
How so you ask? Leadership and compromise.
Leadership and compromise is the only way you can balance two budgets with over $13 billion in deficits without raising taxes while protecting core services.
Leadership and compromise is the only way you reform New Jersey’s pension and health benefits system that was collectively $121 billion underfunded.
Leadership and compromise is the only way you cap the highest property taxes in the nation and cap the interest arbitration awards of some of the most powerful public sector unions in the nation at no greater than a 2% increase.
In New Jersey we have done this, and more, because the Executive Branch has not sat by and waited for others to go first to suggest solutions to our state’s most difficult problems.
Being a mayor, being a governor, being a president means leading by taking risk on the most important issues of the day. It has happened in Trenton.
In New Jersey we have done this with a legislative branch, held by the opposite party, because it is led by two people who have more often put the interests of our state above the partisan politics of their caucuses.
Our bi-partisan accomplishments in New Jersey have helped to set a tone that has taken hold across many other states. It is a simple but powerful message–lead on the tough issues by telling your citizens the truth about the depth of our challenges. Tell them the truth about the difficulty of the solutions. This is the only effective way to lead in America during these times.
In Washington, on the other hand, we have watched as we drift from conflict to conflict, with little or no resolution.
We watch a president who once talked about the courage of his convictions, but still has yet to find the courage to lead.
We watch a Congress at war with itself because they are unwilling to leave campaign style politics at the Capitol’s door. The result is a debt ceiling limitation debate that made our democracy appear as if we could no longer effectively govern ourselves.
And still we continue to wait and hope that our president will finally stop being a bystander in the Oval Office. We hope that he will shake off the paralysis that has made it impossible for him to take on the really big things that are obvious to all Americans and to a watching and anxious world community.
Yes, we hope. Because each and every time the president lets a moment to act pass him by, his failure is our failure too. The failure to stand up for the bipartisan debt solutions of the Simpson Bowles Commission, a report the president asked for himself…the failure to act on the country’s crushing unemployment…the failure to act on ever expanding and rapidly eroding entitlement programs…the failure to discern pork barrel spending from real infrastructure investment.
The rule for effective governance is simple. It is one Ronald Reagan knew by heart. And one that he successfully employed with Social Security and the Cold War. When there is a problem, you fix it. That is the job you have been sent to do and you cannot wait for someone else to do it for you.
We pay for this failure of leadership many times over. The domestic price is obvious: growth slows, high levels of unemployment persist, and we make ourselves even more vulnerable to the unpredictable behavior of skittish markets or the political decisions of lenders.
But, there is also a foreign policy price to pay. To begin with, we diminish our ability to influence the thinking and ultimately the behavior of others. There is no better way to persuade other societies around the world to become more democratic and more market-oriented than to show that our democracy and markets work better than any other system.
Why should we care?
We should care because we believe, as President Reagan did, that democracy is the best protector of human dignity and freedom. And we know this because history shows that mature democracies are less likely to resort to force against their own people or their neighbors.
We should care because we believe in free and open trade, as exports are the best creators of high-paying jobs here and imports are a means to increase consumer choice and keep prices down.
Around the world– in the Middle East, in Asia, in Africa and Latin America—people are debating their own political and economic futures–right now.
We have a stake in the outcome of their debates. For example, a Middle East that is largely democratic and at peace will be a Middle East that accepts Israel, rejects terrorism, and is a dependable source of energy.
There is no better way to reinforce the likelihood that others in the world will opt for more open societies and economies than to demonstrate that our own system is working.
A lot is being said in this election season about American exceptionalism. Implicit in such statements is that we are different and, yes, better, in the sense that our democracy, our economy and our people have delivered. But for American exceptionalism to truly deliver hope and a sterling example to the rest of the world, it must be demonstrated, not just asserted. If it is demonstrated, it will be seen and appreciated and ultimately emulated by others. They will then be more likely to follow our example and our lead.
At one time in our history, our greatness was a reflection of our country’s innovation, our determination, our ingenuity and the strength of our democratic institutions. When there was a crisis in the world, America found a way to come together to help our allies and fight our enemies. When there was a crisis at home, we put aside parochialism and put the greater public interest first. And in our system, we did it through strong presidential leadership. We did it through Reagan-like leadership.
Unfortunately, through our own domestic political conduct of late, we have failed to live up to our own tradition of exceptionalism. Today, our role and ability to affect change has been diminished because of our own problems and our inability to effectively deal with them.
To understand this clearly, one need only look at comments from the recent meeting of the European finance ministers in Poland. Here is what the Finance Minister of Austria had to say:
“I found it peculiar that, even though the Americans have significantly worse fundamental data than the euro zone, that they tell us what we should do. I had expected that, when [Secretary Geithner] tells us how he sees the world, that he would listen to what we have to say.”
You see, without strong leadership at home—without our domestic house in order—we are taking ourselves out of the equation. Over and over, we are allowing the rest of the world to set the tone without American influence.
I understand full well that succeeding at home, setting an example, is not enough. The United States must be prepared to act. We must be prepared to lead. This takes resources—resources for defense, for intelligence, for homeland security, for diplomacy. The United States will only be able to sustain a leadership position around the world if the resources are there—but the necessary resources will only be there if the foundations of the American economy are healthy. So our economic health is a national security issue as well.
Without the authority that comes from that exceptionalism—earned American exceptionalism—we cannot do good for other countries, we cannot continue to be a beacon of hope for the world to aspire to for their future generations.
If Ronald Reagan faced today’s challenges we know what he would do. He would face our domestic problems directly, with leadership and without political calculation.
We would take an honest and tough approach to solving our long-term debt and deficit problem through reforming our entitlement programs and our tax code.
We would confront our unemployment crisis by giving certainty to business about our tax and regulatory future.
We would unleash American entrepreneurship through long-term tax reform, not short-term tax gimmickry.
And we would reform our K-12 education system by applying free market reform principles to education—rewarding outstanding teachers; demanding accountability from everyone in the system; increasing competition through choice and charters; and making the American free public education system once again the envy of the world.
The guiding principle should be simple and powerful—the educational interests of children must always be put ahead of the comfort of the status quo for adults.
The United States must also become more discriminating in what we try to accomplish abroad. We certainly cannot force others to adopt our principles through coercion. Local realities count; we cannot have forced makeovers of other societies in our image. We need to limit ourselves overseas to what is in our national interest so that we can rebuild the foundations of American power here at home – foundations that need to be rebuilt in part so that we can sustain a leadership role in the world for decades to come.
The argument for getting our own house in order is not an argument for turning our back on the world.
We cannot and should not do that. First of all, our economy is dependent on what we export and import. And as we learned the hard way a decade ago, we as a country and a people are vulnerable to terrorists armed with box cutters, bombs, and viruses, be they computer generated or man-made. We need to remain vigilant, and be prepared to act with our friends and allies, to discourage, deter or defend against traditional aggression; to stop the spread of nuclear materials and weapons and the means to deliver them; and to continue to deprive terrorists of the ways, means and opportunity to succeed.
I realize that what I am calling for requires a lot of our elected officials and a lot of our people. I plead guilty. But I also plead guilty to optimism.
Like Ronald Reagan, I believe in what this country and its citizens can accomplish if they understand what is being asked of them and how we all will benefit if they meet the challenge.
There is no doubt in my mind that we, as a country and as a people, are up for the challenge. Our democracy is strong; our economy is the world’s largest. Innovation and risk-taking is in our collective DNA. There is no better place for investment. Above all, we have a demonstrated record as a people and a nation of rising up to meet challenges.
Today, the biggest challenge we must meet is the one we present to ourselves. To not become a nation that places entitlement ahead of accomplishment. To not become a country that places comfortable lies ahead of difficult truths. To not become a people that thinks so little of ourselves that we demand no sacrifice from each other. We are a better people than that; and we must demand a better nation than that.
The America I speak of is the America Ronald Reagan challenged us to be every day. Frankly, it is the America his leadership helped us to be. Through our conduct, our deeds, our demonstrated principles and our sacrifice for each other and for the greater good of the nation, we became a country emulated throughout the world. Not just because of what we said, but because of what we did both at home and abroad.
If we are to reach real American exceptionalism, American exceptionalism that can set an example for freedom around the world, we must lead with purpose and unity.
In 2004, Illinois State Senator Barack Obama gave us a window into his vision for American leadership. He said, “Now even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us — the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of ‘anything goes.’ Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America. There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America — there’s the United States of America.”
Now, seven years later, President Obama prepares to divide our nation to achieve re-election. This is not a leadership style, this is a re-election strategy. Telling those who are scared and struggling that the only way their lives can get better is to diminish the success of others. Trying to cynically convince those who are suffering that the American economic pie is no longer a growing one that can provide more prosperity for all who work hard. Insisting that we must tax and take and demonize those who have already achieved the American Dream. That may turn out to be a good re-election strategy for President Obama, but is a demoralizing message for America. What happened to State Senator Obama? When did he decide to become one of the “dividers” he spoke of so eloquently in 2004? There is, of course, a different choice.
That choice is the way Ronald Reagan led America in the 1980’s. That approach to leadership is best embodied in the words he spoke to the nation during his farewell address in 1989. He made clear he was not there just marking time. That he was there to make a difference. Then he spoke of the city on the hill and how he had made it stronger. He said, “I’ve spoken of the shining city all my political life, but I don’t know if I ever quite communicated what I saw when I said it. But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That’s how I saw it and see it still.”
That is American exceptionalism. Not a punch line in a political speech, but a vision followed by a set of principled actions that made us the envy of the world. Not a re-election strategy, but an American revitalization strategy.
We will be that again, but not until we demand that our leaders stand tall by telling the truth, confronting our shortcomings, celebrating our successes and, once again leading the world because of what we have been able to actually accomplish.
Only when we do that will we finally ensure that our children and grandchildren will live in a second American century. We owe them, as well as ourselves and those who came before us, nothing less.
Thank you again for inviting me—God Bless you and God Bless the United States of America.

Cain nearly quit campaign before Florida straw poll, calls Obama a ‘liar’

2011-09-26T11:59:00.002-05:00

Cain nearly quit campaign before Florida straw poll, calls Obama a ‘liar’

By Chris Moody | The Ticket – 9.26.11

Cain (Joe Burbank/AP)

ORLANDO, Fla. -- Not everyone needs to go to Disney World to have fun in central Florida.
After one of Herman Cain's strongest showings yet at a Republican presidential debate Thursday, and two days with conservative activists in the state, he won the "Presidency 5" straw poll in Orlando over the weekend, beating front-runner Texas Gov. Rick Perry by more than 20 points.

While straw polls are not scientific and their results can be poor indicators of whether a candidate will win a party's nomination--the latest actual Florida poll put Cain near the bottom--they can help spark some momentum, especially for lower-tier candidates. For Cain, a 65-year-old businessman, mathematician, author and radio host from Atlanta, Georgia, his straw poll win could well be the high-water mark of his campaign. And by his own admission, the path that brought him this far wasn't an easy one. The morning before the straw poll, I met Cain for coffee in a hotel near the convention center that hosted the debate and straw poll. As we discussed the early phase of the Republican primaries, he told me that before coming to Florida, he had nearly called it quits on two occasions.

"The thing that I've learned about myself in this campaign--because I've never had this happen to me before on a single challenge--is that I've gone to the brink, ready to pull the plug, but came back, twice," Cain said. "I've only had two days where I personally felt, should I pull the plug? For different reasons. That's how frustrating a campaign can be."

When I pressed for details, he said he'd prefer to keep them to himself.

"I can't tell you what those two days are," he said. "But think about the number of days we've been on this campaign. Two ain't that bad."

Cain is certainly no stranger to adversity, having recently overcome Stage IV colon and liver cancer.
Even though he's known as the "pizza" candidate for his years as head of Godfather's Pizza, his background is much broader than that. After he graduated from Morehouse College with a degree in mathematics and a minor in chemistry in 1968, Cain landed a job as a ballistics analyst for the Department of the Navy, where he was responsible for the calculations that ensured battleship rockets hit their targets.
"It's not an easy thing to do," he said.

Cain later completed a master's degree in computer science and entered the business world where he led several companies--most recently Godfather's--and chaired the National Restaurant Association and the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City. His résumé--from mathematician and rocket scientist to restaurateur and now politician--isn't exactly a typical one for a presidential candidate. But Cain said that while his presidential run may look unlikely from the outside, it's actually part of his larger career trajectory of seeking out new ways to test himself.

"I'm bored if I don't have a challenge," he said.

Cain said the run for the White House is his toughest challenge yet--and it's been anything but boring. Despite the frustrations of running a national campaign, you can tell he's enjoying it. But it doesn't take much to get him riled up.
After a few caffeine-heavy refills at our corner table, I asked him about President Obama's new effort to raise taxes on the wealthy, and Cain just about blew a blood vessel--especially when I mentioned the part where Obama says it's about "math" not "class warfare."

"Can I be blunt? That's a lie," Cain said, before the sound of his voice began to rise noticeably higher. "You're not supposed to call the president a liar. Well if you're not supposed to call the president a liar, he shouldn't tell a lie. If it's not class warfare, it's highway robbery. He wants us to believe it's not class warfare, oh okay, it's not class warfare. Pick my pockets, because that's what he's doing!"
Cain paused, took a breath and looked at me.

"I'm not mad at you, I just get passionate about this stuff," he said. "I have to tell people because I get so worked up . . . . I'm listening to all this bullshit that he's talking about, 'fairness' and 'balanced approach' to get this economy going."

As anyone who watched the past couple of debates knows by now, Cain has his own plan that he says would steer the country out of its economic downturn. He calls it the "9-9-9 Plan," and it would replace the current tax code with three flat, nine-percent federal taxes on income, consumption and business.
"With 9-9-9 guess what? How many loopholes?" he said, tapping his fingers on the table like a drumroll. "None. Everybody gets treated the same. What a novel idea."

As the straw poll and his recent fundraising numbers suggest, Cain's message is resonating with the conservative movement's influential base of tea-party activists; for these supporters his status as a non-career politician with an extensive background in the private sector is nearly as strong a draw as his ideas and policy proposals. But despite his recent surge in support, few expect Cain's momentum to carry him on to victory at the Republican National Convention in 2012.

Cain insisted that the prognostications of a few pundits won't stop him from pressing on as far as his donors will carry him. At the same time, though, he said that this campaign will be his last foray into politics.
"I'm not planning to run for another public office," he said. But regardless, it's been "a hell of a challenge."

PRINCETON: Candidates' takes on consolidation shared at forum

2011-09-22T18:54:00.000-05:00

PRINCETON: Candidates' takes on consolidation shared at forum

DATE POSTED: Thursday, September 22, 2011 Princeton Packet

By Victoria Hurley-Schubert, Staff Writer

Princeton Borough mayoral candidates Yina Moore, left, and Jill Jachera, right, at the Princeton Jewish Center on Tuesday night. Anna Savoia photo

   At the only forum for the Princeton Borough mayoral candidates, the candidates discussed their positions on the biggest issue of the election: consolidation.

   Until now, the candidates have avoided the question.

   Each candidate was given three minutes to offer their stance on the issue that, if passed, could make them a one-year, lame duck mayor or if voted down, would leave them leading a community that will need to work with it’s rejected neighbor.

   Republican Jill Jachera, a newcomer to Princeton Borough when compared with Democratic challenger Yina Moore’s family roots that go back to 1896, got to answer the question first.

   ”Consolidation is a very difficult topic,” said Ms. Jachera, who studied the issue over the summer. “The more I studied it, the more complex it has gotten.”

   ”It definitely is an important decision,” Ms. Moore said. “It is complex and requires careful thought. I have stated in the past I am not convinced. Questions remain for me and they have yet to be answered.”

   Without any successful examples to look at, there is a lot of controversial research out there, Ms. Jachera said.

   ”I personally would like to see the communities consolidate,” she said. “I think that would be a wonderful thing on many levels.”

   But, when it comes to the benefits, she does have some questions about the communities being able to achieve all the benefits — some $3.2 million in savings achieved through efficiencies and some job elimination — -outlined in the Joint Shared Services Consolidation Commission’s (JSSCC) final report.

   ”That’s where I become a little bit of a pessimist,” she said. “One of the things I want to think about is how good government traditionally been at dialing back the needle on spending? I think most of you would agree that doesn’t happen.”

   With the right people in office, spending can be cut, she said.

   The budgeting process would be overhauled, beginning with a start from zero. “It means we start from scratch,” said Ms. Jachera. “We don’t just take the two budgets, lump them together and hope for the best because chances are, whatever we say will promptly be spent on something else.”

   She would like to take a look at the budget on a zero basis, even if consolidation does not pass. Departments would have to develop strategic plans, identify their mission, what it costs to deliver that mission and how many people are required to deliver that mission. “That way we can determine how it’s best to bring together those departments and look for cost savings,” said Ms. Jachera. “Maybe we will find additional cost savings.”

   But, Ms. Jachera would be looking to Princeton Township Mayor Chad Goerner for assurances the township would be willing to do that as part of the joint budgeting process.

   ”I would be much more likely to vote for consolidation,” she said. “I would like to do that.”

   Ms. Moore also had some lingering questions. She wonders what consideration was given to the borough’s new Palmer Square residences that are coming online and the hospital site, which will be coming back onto the tax rolls when the hospital moves to Plainsboro next spring and vacates the site.

   ”These ongoing and upcoming revenues are, in essence, our dowry,” said Ms. Moore. “They would already significantly reduce borough taxes and then where are the annualized budgets ... that show the expenses of the transition?”

   She wonders how these influences on the budget would impact citizens on an annualized basis, saying the JSSCC failed to answer these questions and perform such analysis during the year of study it performed.

   ”What is the joint five-year plan that really ensures and guides us on a straight and agreed upon path and ensures we have savings in the third year and beyond?” she asked. “These seem to be the steps to make more accurate projections. It’s more or less a prenuptial agreement and it has not happened.”

   ”It’s clear to me there was never any prospect of love or money in this,” she said. “As a citizen and executive needing to make a decision, I want to know what those answers are.”

She wonders if the projected 5 percent overall savings the JSSCC estimates are worth the unknown loss of representation.

Princeton mayoral candidates debate hot topic of consolidation

2011-09-22T16:45:00.000-05:00

Princeton mayoral candidates debate hot topic of consolidation

Times of Trenton

Thursday, September 22, 2011, 9:06 AM

Bridget Clerkin

Jill Jachera, Republican candidate for mayor of Princeton Borough (left) and Yina Moore, Democratic candidate for mayor of Princeton Borough.

PRINCETON BOROUGH — Consolidation seemed to be the topic on everyone’s mind at Tuesday night’s mayoral debate, with so many attendees submitting questions on the subject that each candidate was given extra time to discuss it.

Both Republican candidate Jill Jachera and Democrat Yina Moore treated the issue — arguably Princeton’s hottest topic this election season — with an air of caution throughout the debate, held at the Jewish Center of Princeton and hosted by the League of Women Voters.

“There’s lots of controversial information out there that makes this a difficult situation,” Jachera said.

And while Jachera said she would personally like to see the communities consolidate, she added, “I don’t know if it will reap the benefits they’re talking about — that’s where I become pessimistic.”

Residents of Princeton Borough and Princeton Township will vote on the consolidation issue in a referendum Nov. 8, the fifth time it will come before voters. The last time was in 1996, when voters turned it down.

This time around, one of the most sensitive questions has been whether township and borough residents have enough in common to be able to function under one government. Another is whether consolidation would produce significant savings.

If consolidation isn’t approved by voters, Moore said she would also call for a thorough review of the borough’s shared-services budget, which, she said, has remained flat over the past several years.

“I don’t know if that’s something to praise or look more into, but we do need to look at shared services we assume are running efficiently,” she said.

Pointing to recent studies showing the cost savings in consolidated towns are not always as high as anticipated, Jachera said she would hope to find savings instead by building the newly merged community’s budget from scratch, rather than simply lumping the two budgets together.

She would also ask all department heads to form strategic plans.

“If I had those assurances, I would be much more likely to vote for consolidation,” she said.

Moore said her questions about the potential merger centered around the communities’ stark differences in tax ratables — property or income that can be appraised and taxed.

Most notable, Moore said, are new Palmer Square residential developments that she said are worth $2 million in property tax revenue, and future property taxes from a development slated for the site Princeton HealthCare Systems plans to vacate when it moves to a new hospital in Plainsboro next year.

Jachera also said she was concerned about the borough’s budget, saying it has been patched up with surplus cash over the years to keep taxes steady and that the borough can no longer rely on such tactics.

“It’s one way they’ve tried to make things look good, but it’s not prudent,” Jachera said, adding that the problem has caused the borough’s bond rating to drop to AA, while the township still enjoys a AAA status.

“It’s a false sense of security and costing us money,” she said.

Borough voters will decide between Jachera and Moore in the Nov. 8 election. The two were selected by voters in the June primary election. Mayor Mildred Trotman is not seeking re-election.

While the widely attended debate Tuesday seemed to be packed with residents already sporting pins for one candidate or the other, at least one member of the audience seemed unable to make up his mind.

“We have two earnest, intelligent individuals running — either of whom might serve the borough,” said resident Roger Martindell.

Pay cuts don't deter large Hamilton union from endorsing Mayor John Bencivengo for re-election

2011-09-22T11:00:00.000-05:00

HAMILTON — The blue collar municipal union that accepted GOP Mayor John Bencivengo’s 2010 wage reduction “furlough” plan has endorsed the Republican’s 2011 campaign for re-election.

AFSCME Hamilton Local 2475 — Hamilton’s largest government employee union — has thrown its official support for the re-election of Bencivengo and Republican Township Council reps Kevin Meara and Kelly Yaede.

“The administration of Mayor Bencivengo has been honest, open and forthright with our local in all of the matters involving our union,” said Keith Herrick , President of AFSCME Local 2475. “We are happy to endorse the Bencivengo, Yaede and Meara team; and we look forward to actively working to get out the vote for their re-election this November.”

AFSCME Local 2475 comprises mostly manual laborers who work under the Department of Public Works or the Water Pollution Control facility. These are the blue collar workers who repave the roads and clean out the sewer lines.

This week’s endorsement added to Bencivengo’s union endorsements from last week, in which the Mercer-Burlington Building Trades Council and all 22 of the Trade Council’s local unions unanimously endorsed Bencivengo for re-election.

The Building Trades Council endorsement was significant because the president of that union, Democratic state Assemblyman Wayne DeAngelo, endorsed the Republican rather than Democratic challenger Connie Carella Dalton.

Dalton and Democratic Township Council candidates Dan Keelan and Tennille McCoy have chastised Bencivengo for implementing the furlough plan, which the Democrats said was imposed on the township workers in a heavy-handed manner.

In addition to receiving the re-election endorsement of the trade unions and AFSCME Local 2475, Bencivengo also received an endorsement from the AFSCME Council No. 73, which represents more than 10,000 public and private-sector workers in 66 local unions throughout New Jersey.

Dalton, owner of the Carella’s Hallmark & Chocolates shop on Nottingham Way, said the union members who endorsed Bencivengo should know that Bencivengo’s administration failed to apply for a lucrative state Department of Transportation grant in 2009.

“He did not apply for it even after I reminded him several times,” Dalton said. “We were the only municipality not to receive funding. I do support our unions and if the mayor had not ignored my requests, I would have had our local workers very busy for the last two years.”

Bencivengo’s furlough plan was an effective pay cut in the form of eight compulsory unpaid absences for township employees. He offered that as a cost-cutting concession to avoid having to lay off workers or raise taxes.

Last year, all six of the township’s municipal unions accepted Bencivengo’s furlough plan. The AFSCME Local 2475 union is the largest of the six, representing about 200 township workers. The township has about 600 employees total.

Rutgers-Eagleton Poll: Voters Strongly Support Sports Betting

2011-09-19T07:02:00.000-05:00

Rutgers-Eagleton Poll: Voters Strongly Support Sports Betting

By Mel Fabrikant Wednesday, October 19, 2011, Paramus Post

If the election were today, an amendment to the New Jersey Constitution allowing gambling on sporting events in Atlantic City casinos and at race tracks throughout the state would easily win approval, according to a new Rutgers-Eagleton Poll. Betting on sports events, which will be on the November 8 general election ballot, is supported by 58 percent of likely voters, while only 31 percent oppose. Among Republicans support is even higher, at 64 percent, while 58 percent of Democrats and 54 percent of independents also favor the measure.

“While it amends the New Jersey Constitution, this ballot measure will not have any practical effect unless the federal government lifts its ban on sports betting,” said poll Director David Redlawsk, a professor of political science at Rutgers University. “Nonetheless, New Jerseyans are ready to position
New Jersey to take advantage of any change in federal law.”

Results are from a poll of 903 adults, including a sample of 821 registered voters and 603 likely voters conducted among both landline and cell phone households from Oct. 6-9. The sample of likely voters has a margin of error of +/- 4.0 percentage points, while the registered voter sample has a margin
of error of +/-3.5 percentage points.

Shore counties most supportive
Voters living in the New Jersey Shore counties of Monmouth, Ocean and Atlantic are the state’s strongest supporters of gambling on sporting events. Nearly three-quarters of likely Shore voters would support sports gambling, while suburban voters are far behind at 57 percent. Just over half (54 percent) of South Jersey/Camden area voters support the measure, similar to North Jersey urban and exurban voters at 52 percent and 51 percent in favor. “Supporters argue sports gambling would provide a much needed economic boost to the gaming industry and bring in new revenue to the state” said Redlawsk. “The potential for economic benefit seems to overcome any possible doubts in the part of the state that should gain the most.”

Likely voters in union households are more supportive than those not in unions, 63 percent to 56 percent. Employment status, however, does not appear to have a significant impact on support for sports Sports Gambling Amendment, October 2011 betting. Those employed full time and those not employed at all have the same level of support at 58 percent.

Catholics are stronger supporters than Protestants
Almost two thirds of Catholic likely voters support sports gambling, while 48 percent of Protestant voters agree. One-quarter of Catholics oppose the measure as do 40 percent of Protestants. Voters who call themselves evangelical or born-again Christians are nearly evenly split; 46 percent opposed and 44 percent in favor.

Frequency of attendance at religious services appears more important than any specific religion, with fewer than half (47 percent) of those who attend services at least weekly in favor of allowing betting on sports. Support steadily increases as attendance declines: 58 percent of those who attend
almost every week and more than 60 percent of those who attend less often favor the proposal.

“It’s not all that surprising that while Catholics support this proposal, evangelicals are most opposed,” said Redlawsk. “Economic development needs may well take a back seat to questions of morality among those who are more conservative in their religious traditions.”

Men and younger voters more likely to support sports betting
While more than six-in-10 men support legalized sports betting, only 54 percent of likely women voters agree. One-third are opposed and 13 percent not sure where they stand. Only 28 percent of men oppose the measure and 10 percent are uncertain. Almost three-quarters (72 percent) of younger likely
voters supports sports betting while only 23 percent oppose it. Voters at least 65 years old are much more against sports wagering: 48 percent are in favor and 40 percent are against the measure.

“Assuming the likely passage of the amendment, New Jersey voters will send a strong message to the state’s political leaders to continue pressing the federal government for change,” said Redlawsk.

“In this economic environment any reasonable opportunity for significant revenue to the state looks pretty good to voters.”

Challenger demands that Executive Hughes bring in big horses to fight crime

2011-09-18T18:37:00.001-05:00

Challenger demands that Executive Hughes bring in big horses to fight crime

Sunday, September 18, 2011 By JOAN GALLER
Trentonian

TRENTON — Jonathan Savage, Republican candidate for Mercer County executive, has challenged County Executive Brian Hughes to mobilize the entire county law enforcement community to fight spreading violence in Mercer County.

“We need a coordinated regional law enforcement community that includes hard-minded action to combat hard-minded crime,” declared the GOP hopeful, who resides in Ewing.

Savage’s call for action came as 105 Trenton police officers were laid off and another murder victim lay dead in Trenton following a street shooting in the upscale Mill Hill neighborhood.

“The front pages of our local papers are rarely without news of a murder, shooting, carjacking, robbery or other violent crime in Mercer County,” Savage said.

He blasted incumbent Democrat Hughes for his “lack of leadership” in dealing with the problem.

“Violent crime has no borders. It is time to join all of the municipal and county law enforcement agencies into a unified force, put more officers on the street and then back them up with a strong prosecutor’s office with orders to put violent criminals behind bars.”

Citing published reports, Savage said shootings have nearly doubled in the county in the past year: 42 victims from January to mid-August 2010 compared to 82 victims in the same period in 2011.

“We have 115 sheriff’s officers with a K-9 unit and a SERT team in Mercer County, which rivals and surpasses in size most of the municipal police forces in Mercer County,” Savage said, “but where have they been? Do we need so many protecting the county’s airport or administration building? Do we need so many on the streets ticketing speeders with their radar guns? Let’s put their manpower where it belongs — on the streets!”

Savage also leveled a volley at county Prosecutor Joe Bocchini for cutting lenient plea deals and giving “thugs who commit violent acts soft sentences” instead of throwing the book at them.

“It’s time for the county prosecutor to step up to the plate,” Savage said.

Labor endorses Bencivengo: GOP stoking GOTV for heavy turnout

2011-09-14T16:10:00.004-05:00

Hamilton Mayor John Bencivengo

Labor endorses Bencivengo: GOP stoking GOTV for heavy turnout

By Darryl R. Isherwood | September 14th, 2011 Politickernj

Republican Hamilton Mayor John Bencivengo, who is running for his second terms as mayor of the state’s ninth largest city, Wednesday received the endorsement of the Mercer-Burlington Counties and Vicinity Building Trades Council, AFL-CIO.

The union endorsement comes with a bit of irony as the president of the council, Wayne DeAngelo, is a Democrat running for reelection to the state Assembly in the 14^th District, which includes Hamilton.
“Mayor Bencivengo has demonstrated a genuine concern for working families, responsible labor practices and the right to collective bargaining, which our local councils recognize and support,” said DeAngelo, who is assistant business manager of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local #269.
Bencivengo is facing off against Democrat Connie Carella Dalton, a local business owner, for the top spot in Hamilton government.

“I believe that the American worker is the backbone of the American Dream,” said Bencivengo. “I am both humbled and proud to have the support of our local building trades and am eager to continue working cooperatively with local labor as I seek to expand economic opportunities for working families across Hamilton Township.”

Bencivengo is nearing the end of his first term, secured in 2007 with the defeat of two-term Democrat Glen Gilmore. Mercer County Republican sources say though the party is expecting Bencivengo to win going away, he is nevertheless pushing for a large get out the vote effort.

His goal, GOP sources said, is to win big enough that he and Hamilton will be players in the coming gubernatorial election.

“If he wins Hamilton by a huge margin, we’re hoping the governor will take notice,” one source said.

Bencivengo is joined on the Republican ticket by Council members Kelly Yaede and Kevin Meara. All five members of the Hamilton council are Republicans and the GOP is pushing to keep Democrats from making inroads.

Meara is a former Democrat who won election to the council as a Republican in 2007. Yaede has also served on the school board in Hamilton and works for the American Cancer Society.

They are opposed by Democrats Tennille McCoy and Daniel Keelan. Keelan is the owner of a telecommunications form in town and McCoy is a part-time Realtor who works with the Camden Board of Education.

Republicans have controlled Hamilton government since 2007 with the victories of Bencivengo, Yaede and Meara. The loss of both branches of government was a stunning turnaround for Democrats who from 2002 to 2006 had held the council and the mayor's office and were considered on the upswing in the traditionally Republican controlled township.

However a series of controversial moves by the Democrats stoked voter anger and ushered Republicans Tom Goodwin, Dave Kenny and Dennis Pone into office. The three were followed by Yaede who won a special election for an unexpired term and later reelection to a full term. Meara joined the council in 2007 , completing the GOP sweep.

Republicans in town are hoping that the mayor’s reelection run will help to boost turnout for the GOP in its bid to take the senate seat and two 14^th District Assembly seats on the ballot.

Republican Richard Kanka of Hamilton is facing Democratic incumbent Linda Greenstein in the 14th District and heavy GOP turnout could boost his chances, Republicans say. Both Democratic Assemblyman Wayne DeAngelo and Assemblyman Dan Benson are from Hamilton and they are facing out of towners in Republicans Wayne Wittman of Cranbury and Sheree McGowan of Robbinsville.

John Cifelli: Ewing needs techy 911 system

2011-09-13T10:06:00.005-05:00

John Cifelli: Ewing needs techy 911 system
Monday, September 12, 2011
By JOAN GALLER
jgaller@trentonian.com

EWING — Republican township council candidate John Cifelli, who grew up in the digital age, wants Ewing to embrace the latest technology to reach all residents during emergencies like Hurricane Irene.

Since Ewing is home to thousands of college students and tenants who rely exclusively on cell phones and computers, notes Cifelli, the township cannot limit its emergency alerts to “outdated reverse 911 landline” phone calls.

“Landlines do not work when the power is down so even more people with landlines are unreachable under the current emergency system,” he said.

The solution, says Cifelli, is a township emergency system that is current with the times at minimal cost, “where people register their phone, email, whatever with the township emergency response team.”

Such a system is now operational in Hamilton Township and New York City, and at Rutgers University, where Cifelli, 26, earned a degree in meteorology, “so why not in Ewing?”

Cifelli, who hopes to win the council seat vacated by Democratic Mayor Bert Steinmann in the November election, notes he grew up in a digital world where “text messaging, whether via SMS or Twitter, is either cheap or free, unlike landlines.

“If residents lost phone service or power, cell phones can be a more effective way of receiving information,” he said. Residents can be reached outside their homes and in near real-time by typing a quick message.

Adding this service to the reverse-911 system

“may be the difference between life and death,” Cifelli said, referring to Hurricane Irene and other storms that forced emergency evacuations and “showed every minute counts, but it only counts if you know you are in danger.”

The township already requires landlord registration with tenant contact information and has the technology, Cifelli said in a prepared statement, “so it is time to combine them and save lives.”

The 9/11 ‘overreaction’? Nonsense.

2011-09-11T10:54:00.003-05:00

The 9/11 ‘overreaction’? Nonsense.

By Charles Krauthammer, Published: September 8 Washington Post

The new conventional wisdom on 9/11: We have created a decade of fear. We overreacted to 9/11 — al-Qaeda turned out to be a paper tiger; there never was a second attack — thereby bankrupting the country, destroying our morale and sending us into national decline.

The secretary of defense says that al-Qaeda is on the verge of strategic defeat. True. But why? Al-Qaeda did not spontaneously combust. Yet, in a decade Osama bin Laden went from the emir of radical Islam, jihadi hero after whom babies were named all over the Muslim world — to pathetic old recluse, almost incommunicado, watching shades of himself on a cheap TV in a bare room.

What turned the strong horse into the weak horse? Precisely the massive and unrelenting American war on terror, a systematic worldwide campaign carried out with increasing sophistication, efficiency and lethality — now so cheaply denigrated as an “overreaction.”

First came the Afghan campaign, once so universally supported that Democrats for years complained that President Bush was not investing enough blood and treasure there. Now, it is reduced to a talking point as one of “the two wars” that bankrupted us. Yet Afghanistan was utterly indispensable in defeating the jihadis then and now. We think of Pakistan as the terrorist sanctuary. We fail to see that Afghanistan is our sanctuary, the base from which we have freedom of action to strike Jihad Central in Pakistan and the border regions.
Iraq, too, was decisive, though not in the way we intended. We no more chose it to be the central campaign in the crushing of al-Qaeda than Eisenhower chose the Battle of the Bulge as the locus for the final destruction of the German war machine.

Al-Qaeda, uninvited, came out to fight us in Iraq, and it was not just defeated but humiliated. The local population — Arab, Muslim, Sunni, under the supposed heel of the invader — joined the infidel and rose up against the jihadi in its midst. It was a singular defeat from which al-Qaeda never recovered.

True, in both wars there was much trial, error and tragic loss. In Afghanistan, too much emphasis on nation-building. In Iraq, the bloody middle years before we found our general and our strategy. But cannot the same be said of, for example, the Civil War, the terrible years before Lincoln found his general? Or the Pacific campaign of World War II, with its myriad miscalculations, its often questionable island-hopping, that cost infinitely more American lives?

In the end: 10 years, no second attack (which everyone assumed would come within months). That testifies to the other great achievement of the decade: the defensive anti-terror apparatus hastily constructed from scratch after 9/11 by President Bush, and then continued by President Obama. Continued why? Because it worked. It kept us safe — the warrantless wiretaps, the Patriot Act, extraordinary rendition, preventive detention and, yes, Guantanamo.

Perhaps, says the new conventional wisdom, but these exertions have bankrupted the country and led to our current mood of despair and decline.

Rubbish. The total cost of “the two wars” is $1.3 trillion. That’s less than 1/11th of the national debt, less than one year of Obama deficit spending. During the golden Eisenhower 1950s of robust economic growth averaging 5 percent annually, defense spending was 11 percent of GDP and 60 percent of the federal budget. Today, defense spending is 5 percent of GDP and 20 percent of the budget. So much for imperial overstretch.

Yes, we are approaching bankruptcy. But this has as much to do with the war on terror as do sunspots. Looming insolvency comes not from our shrinking defense budget but from the explosion of entitlements. They devour nearly half the federal budget.

As for the Great Recession and financial collapse, you can attribute it to misguided federal policy pushing homeownership through risky subprime lending. To Fannie and Freddie. To greedy bankers, unscrupulous lenders, naive (and greedy) home buyers. To computer-enabled derivatives so complicated and interwoven as to elude control. But to the war on terror? Nonsense.

9/11 was our Pearl Harbor. This time, however, the enemy had no home address. No Tokyo. Which is why today’s war could not be wrapped up in a mere four years. It was unconventional war by an unconventional enemy embedded within a worldwide religious community. Yet in a decade, we largely disarmed and defeated it, and developed the means to continue to pursue its remnants at rapidly decreasing cost. That is a historic achievement.

Our current difficulties and gloom are almost entirely economic in origin, the bitter fruit of misguided fiscal, regulatory and monetary policies that had nothing to do with 9/11. America’s current demoralization is not a result of the war on terror. On the contrary. The denigration of the war on terror is the result of our current demoralization, of retroactively reading today’s malaise into the real — and successful — history of our 9/11 response.

Hurricane Benefit for Mercer County and Blood Drive

2011-09-02T11:09:00.002-05:00

Hurricane Benefit for Mercer County and Blood Drive

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

HAMILTON, NJ - Mercer County Republicans with Lisa Richford (Surrogate), Richard Urbani (Sheriff), Dion Clark (Freeholder), David Maher (Freeholder) and James Castelize III (Freeholder) are hosting a fundraiser to aid Mercer residents impacted by Hurricane Irene on Sunday, September 4, at 4 p.m. until 7 p.m. inside the Nottingham Firehouse Ballroom, 200 Mercer Street, Hamilton, NJ. All proceeds will benefit Catholic Charities and Christine's Hope for Kids.

Suggested donations for the pasta dinner are $15 per person, $25 for couples and $10 for students and the event is open to the public. Proceeds will benefit Catholic Charities and Christine's Hope for Kids. Catholic Charities is a registered 501(c)3 non-profit organization, and the largest private network of social service organizations in the United States. The organization works to support families, reduce poverty, and build communities and is providing direct relief to Mercer County residents affected by this storm. Christine's Hope for Kids is a registered 501(c)3, whose mission is to raise money to help underprivileged children, provide them with opportunities to learn, laugh, grow and excel, and provide experiences that will have a positive impact on their lives. The non-profit will be focusing its efforts on children in Mercer County affected by Hurricane Irene. Please make all checks payable to Catholic Charities or Christine's Hope for Kids.

There are hundreds of people in Mercer County who have lost their homes and thousands with serious damage. Many households in Ewing, Princeton and Hightstown are still without power.

The candidates will also be conducting a clothing and food drive throughout the day. All donations will be given to Catholic Charities. Hurricane victims are in particular need of canned vegetables and fruits, soups and instant breakfasts for babies and small infants. Clean, gently used clothing will also be collected for those whose personal items were destroyed by flood waters.

For those who cannot attend, Mercer Republicans also will be collecting food and clothing at the Mercer Republican Headquarters, 1905 Route 33 in Hamilton.

In addition, the Community Blood Council of New Jersey will be on site collecting blood and platelets. Irene left behind an urgent shortage of blood and community members are urged to consider donating blood to replenish depleted supplies.

"After seeing the devastation to Mercer County from this storm today, we decided something needed to be done to help our residents,'' Castelize said. "There is a time for politics and a time to campaign. This is not one of those times. We all need to come together and take the time to help those affected by this costly and tragic event.''

For more information or to RSVP, please contact Jim Castelize at jim@castelizeformercer.com

Assistance For Hurricane-Impacted Businesses Available

2011-09-02T05:30:00.000-05:00

Assistance For Hurricane-Impacted Businesses Available

For businesses who suffered losses during the Hurricane, business owners must first contact their County Office of Emergency Management and their insurance provider.

For information about New Jersey State assistance for businesses, please contact the New Jersey Business Action Center at (866) 534-7789 and speak with a specialist. State assistance programs, including the Main Street Disaster Relief Program, can also be viewed at www.newjerseybusiness.gov.

Federal assistance loans for businesses in designated counties will be available through the U.S. Small Business Administration. Visit www.sba.gov for the SBA’s Disaster Loan Program or call the SBA Customer Service Center at 800-659-2955 or send an email to disastercustomerservice@sba.gov. Disaster loans can be applied for electronically from SBA’s website at https://disasterloan.sba.gov/ela/

Federal Emergency Management Association (FEMA): The number to file a claim for federal assistance for damage to both personal and business property is (800) 621-FEMA. Application can also be made at http://www.fema.gov/assistance/index.shtm

My Response To Buffett And Obama

2011-08-22T16:22:00.000-05:00

My Response To Buffett And Obama
Before you ask for more tax money from me, raise the $2.2 trillion you already collect each year more fairly and spend it more wisely.
August 22, 2011
Wall Street Journal
By HARVEY GOLUB

Over the years, I have paid a significant portion of my income to the various federal, state and local jurisdictions in which I have lived, and I deeply resent that President Obama has decided that I don't need all the money I've not paid in taxes over the years, or that I should leave less for my children and grandchildren and give more to him to spend as he thinks fit. I also resent that Warren Buffett and others who have created massive wealth for themselves think I'm "coddled" because they believe they should pay more in taxes. I certainly don't feel "coddled" because these various governments have not imposed a higher income tax. After all, I did earn it.

Now that I'm 72 years old, I can look forward to paying a significant portion of my accumulated wealth in estate taxes to the federal government and, depending on the state I live in at the time, to that state government as well. Of my current income this year, I expect to pay 80%-90% in federal income taxes, state income taxes, Social Security and Medicare taxes, and federal and state estate taxes. Isn't that enough?
Others could pay higher taxes if they choose. They could voluntarily write a check or they could advocate that their gifts to foundations should be made with after-tax dollars and not be deductible. They could also pay higher taxes if they were not allowed to set up foundations to avoid capital gains and estate taxes.

What gets me most upset is two other things about this argument: the unfair way taxes are collected, and the violation of the implicit social contract between me and my government that my taxes will be spent—effectively and efficiently—on purposes that support the general needs of the country. Before you call me greedy, make sure you operate fairly on both fronts.

Today, top earners—the 250,000 people who earn $1 million or more—pay 20% of all income taxes, and the 3% who earn more than $200,000 pay almost half. Almost half of all filers pay no income taxes at all. Clearly they earn less and should pay less. But they should pay something and have a stake in our government spending their money too.

In addition, the extraordinarily complex tax code is replete with favors to various interest groups and industries, favors granted by politicians seeking to retain power. Mortgage interest deductions support the private housing industry at the expense of renters. Generous fringe benefits are not taxed at all, in order to support union and government workers at the expense of people who buy their own insurance with after-tax dollars. Gifts to charities are deductible but gifts to grandchildren are not. That's just a short list, and all of it is unfair.

Governments have an obligation to spend our tax money on programs that work. They fail at this fundamental task. Do we really need dozens of retraining programs with no measure of performance or results? Do we really need to spend money on solar panels, windmills and battery-operated cars when we have ample energy supplies in this country? Do we really need all the regulations that put an estimated $2 trillion burden on our economy by raising the price of things we buy? Do we really need subsidies for domestic sugar farmers and ethanol producers?

Why do we require that public projects pay above-market labor costs? Why do we spend billions on trains that no one will ride? Why do we keep post offices open in places no one lives? Why do we subsidize small airports in communities close to larger ones? Why do we pay government workers above-market rates and outlandish benefits? Do we really need an energy department or an education department at all?
Here's my message: Before you "ask" for more tax money from me and others, raise the $2.2 trillion you already collect each year more fairly and spend it more wisely. Then you'll need less of my money.

Mr. Golub, a former chairman and CEO of American Express, currently serves on the executive committee of the American Enterprise Institute.

Chris Christie, America’s Caesar

2011-08-20T13:11:00.000-05:00

Chris Christie, America’s Caesar
Washington Post By George F. Will,
Published: August 19, 2011

Trenton.

Near the statehouse office of New Jersey’s 55th governor sits a sort of shrine to the 34th. Fortunately, Chris Christie is unlike Woodrow Wilson.

Christie, who resembles Falstaff in girth and Jack Dempsey in pugnacity, is a visceral politician who thrives on conflict. Wilson — lean, intellectual and pious, particularly about himself — regarded opposition as impious.

Wilson acquired the governorship, his first elective office, in January 1911, having learned about government mostly from books he wrote about it. (And he wrote “Congressional Government” without ever seeing Congress.) Eighteen months later he was the Democrats’ presidential nominee.

Christie’s only previous elective office was as county freeholder. But later, as the state’s only U.S. attorney, he became prominent while learning a lot about New Jersey’s gamy political culture by prosecuting some of the participants. This unsentimental political education prepared him so well for the governorship that today, in his 20th month, he is being importuned to seek the Republican presidential nomination.

He won’t. Here’s why.

He relishes being America’s Caesar — its most powerful governor. He wields a line-item veto, he can revise spending numbers but only down (he blocked $1.3 billion in spending this year) and he can exercise a “conditional veto,” rewriting legislation and sending it back to the Legislature for approval. The governor and the lieutenant governor, who run in tandem, are the only state officials elected statewide. The governor appoints the attorney general, treasurer, comptroller, all judges and all county prosecutors.

Understanding the first rule regarding political power — “use it or lose it” — he has flexed his institutional muscles. “I don’t want to leave my political capital in my desk drawer to frame when I leave.” A legislature, he says, “is almost genetically predisposed to inaction.” To get it to move on his combative agenda for taming public employees unions, he held 30 town meetings in nine months — almost one a week.

The Democratic leader of the state Senate has been an ally. Head of the local ironworkers union, he understands how much private-sector union members resent paying the taxes that fund the perquisites of public-sector unions.

As U.S. attorney, a federal employee, Christie paid 34 percent of his health-care premiums while state and local employees were paying 1.5 percent of their salaries. A $60,000-a-year teacher would pay $900 for a $19,000 policy, with taxpayers picking up the other $18,100. This year the Democratic-controlled Legislature has agreed to cutting benefits for 750,000 state employees and retirees, increasing current employees’ health care and pension contributions, suspending cost-of-living increases and raising retirement ages. Projected savings: $120 billion over 30 years.

In the 10 years before Christie became governor, property taxes rose 70 percent, primarily to fund the local salaries, pensions and health care that mayors say account for 75 percent of their costs. Previous state administrations had raised taxes 115 times in eight years. Christie vetoed a “millionaire’s” tax that the Legislature said would raise $500 million and with which the Legislature proposed to fund $3 billion in spending. Christie says, “I almost wanted to sign it to see that magic happen.” The previous millionaire’s tax (which expired in 2009 and hit “millionaires” earning $400,000) followed the flight of $70 billion in wealth as “the rich,” including small businesses, left the state.

Taxing the rich is popular, but Christie told New Jersey: “If I let my foot off their throat on the millionaire’s tax, they’re coming after you with the gas tax.” That is, the 24-cent increase in the tax the Legislature can’t get past him.

Christie was one of the first rocks on which Barack Obama’s overrated political potency crashed. In 2009, Obama campaigned for Gov. Jon Corzine and against Christie in July, October and the Sunday before Christie won handily. No one outside of Washington has made more political waves in the past 20 months than Christie, and no one inside Washington has been as successful.

But he has four children, ages 8 to 17, he will not abandon for presidential politics. When he visited a workaholic aide during her difficult labor before her daughter was born, he said, “Put away your BlackBerry, you are in the middle of a miracle.” As subtle as a linebacker, as direct as an uppercut, Christie, explaining why he will not run, demonstrates why many wish he would. When supporters argue, “You can’t say you’re not ready — look at Obama,” he replies: “Yeah, look at him.”

Hightstown council members defend their votes on revamp of police department

2011-08-19T11:57:00.001-05:00

Hightstown council members defend their votes on revamp of police department

Times of TrentonAugust 19, 2011, 8:26 AM Joshua Riseneau

HIGHTSTOWN — The split 3-2 decision this week on an ordinance revamping the police department and placing officers under the supervision of a civilian police director resulted in further infighting among members of the borough council.
Republican council members Skye Gilmartin and Lynne Woods both voted against the ordinance Monday. A third Republican, Selena Bibens, was absent due to a family obligation, she said. In a written statement, Bibens expressed her intent to join Republican council members to deadlock the measure, but she failed to show up to cast a vote.
Further attempts by Gilmartin and Woods to amend, discuss and deliberate the ordinance before the vote was taken failed against the temporary majority held by Democrats Isabel McGinty, Lawrence Quattrone and J. Michael Vanderbeck.
What followed on Wednesday was a battle of rival editorials on local online news websites, in which Gilmartin and Woods clarified their positions on the ordinance.
“We voted ‘no’ on this Ordinance because we believe that in its totality it does not best serve the community of Hightstown,” Woods and Gilmartin said in their online editorial. The ordinance is missing procedures that safeguard the integrity of the selection process for a police director and for internal promotions in the police department, they complained.
Gilmartin and Woods also expressed their hope that the process of making decisions in the borough will improve if greater weight is given to comments from the public.
McGinty responded swiftly to the Republicans’ dissent, sending out her own comment on the online editorial that day.
“The real question is why they sought to stonewall and delay the council vote past September 1, when the current police chief will retire,” McGinty wrote.
“The new ordinance mandates that a civilian director, not a chief, will head the police department as of that date. Police chiefs tend to remain in that position until retirement (with rare and complicated exceptions); a police director can be removed at any time,” McGinty said, referencing difficulties negotiating the retirement of outgoing police chief James Eufemia.
In an interview last night, Bibens responded to the heightened debate.
“It’s become something bigger than it needs to be,” she said.
Bibens reiterated her misgivings about the bill, but she said she was uncertain whether she would introduce a measure to amend the ordinance once she returns to council.
Bibens did not offer any further explanation of the family obligation that led her to miss Monday’s meeting. As of last night she and her family were out of state, she said.

Chris Christie: 'You Can't Lead from Behind'

2011-08-17T13:23:00.009-05:00

Chris Christie: 'You Can't Lead from Behind'
RealClearPolitics

11:01 AM, Aug 17, 2011 • By DANIEL HALPER

New Jersey Gov. Christie answers a question: "The important skill Terry really that they're talking about I think in that [New York Times] column and what people are hungering for in the country is someone in the White House who will lead and take risk. You know, I mean, things have gone--- what was your phrase? --- a modicum of success, I might be a little more enthusiastic than that but we've had some real success here and I think that one of the reasons we've had real success is because leaders have been willing to lead. Right? So if that means if you're me, you take a chance and you put a pension and benefit reform proposal out there that you know are going to anger a lot of people but that you believe in your heart is the right thing to do for the majority of people in the state, while also protecting the pensions of even those people who are angry about the proposal ---- and that's leading. Going out there and doing thirty town hall meetings, and arguing your case for it both in the press and in the public despite whatever the political ramifications may be. That's leading.

And then you have Steve Sweeney, who despite the fact that he led a Democratic caucus in the State Senate, the majority of which was against it, he believed in his heart as a leader this was something that he had to do and he did it. He led and he's led to his own political detriment as the AFL-CIO and the NJEA have tried to prove to him. I think he'll have the last laugh in the long haul because I think people in this state like leaders regardless of their party.

And the same thing with Sheila Oliver and the members of the General Assembly who were in the minority in their caucus who decided anyway to post that bill, to stand up and do the right thing.

You can't lead from behind. Leading is not a political strategy. It's a moral strategy. You know, I've said many times about the President who I have admiration for, and who I agree with on a number of issues. But man, get out there and tell us what you believe and be willing to fight for it even if people disagree with it. They're going to give you points. They're going to give you points for being willing to speak your mind. I can't tell you how many times I was walking along the beach in various parts of New Jersey this past week where I had people come up to me and say I don't agree with you all the time but at least you're doing something. People will give you credit for that even if they don't agree with you every time. Nobody agrees with me all the time. I barely agree with me all the time. So, you know, so you go out and you do the best you can."

Gov. Chris Christie's N.J. poll numbers on the rise while President Obama's ratings

2011-08-17T12:15:00.003-05:00

Gov. Chris Christie's N.J. poll numbers on the rise while President Obama's ratings
August 17, 2011
Times of Trenton
Matt Friedman/Statehouse Bureau

Tim Larsen/Governor's OfficeGov. Chris Christie greets President Obama at Newark Liberty International Airport in this 2010 file photo while Newark Mayor Cory Booker looks on. A poll released today shows Christie's approval numbers rising while Obama's are falling

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie’s poll numbers have improved while President Obama’s hit a new low in the Garden State, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released this morning.
New Jersey registered voters are split on what they think of Christie, with 47 percent approving and 46 percent disapproving. That’s slightly better for Christie than a June Quinnipiac poll, when 44 percent approved and 47 percent disapproved.
Obama’s approval ratings have suffered, with 52 percent of voters disapproving and 44 percent approving — down from a positive 50 percent to 46 percent in June.
And U.S. Sen. Robert Menendez, up for re-election next year, also saw his rating drop, to 39 percent and 42 percent disapprove – down from a positive 45 percent to 38 percent in June.
The poll, conducted from Aug. 9 to Aug. 15, is the first from Quinnipiac since Christie signed legislation to overhaul the state’s pension and health care benefits for public workers, then slashed programs for the poor in the budget Democrats sent him. It also comes after a divisive debate between President Obama and congressional Republicans on raising the debt ceiling.
“Menendez has a lot of work to do with his re-election year coming up,” said pollster Maurice Carroll. “The debt ceiling hullaballoo has taken a toll on him and on President Obama.”
The poll also asked voters, most of whom heard about the Christie’s recent asthma attack, if they’re concerned about his health. Only 18 percent said they were.
“Almost all the neighbors heard about Gov. Christie’s asthma attack. They might have read his lament about being over-weight, but they’re not worried about his health,” Carroll said.
Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver don’t appear to have benefitted from railing against Christie’s budget cuts and unsuccessfully attempting to overturn many of them. Both Democratic leaders saw their approval ratings fall by a few points.
The Quinnipiac University Polling Institute surveyed 1,624 registered voters. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.4 percentage points.

Iowa GOP Caucus on Fox News — Full debate

2011-08-11T22:40:00.001-05:00

Iowa GOP Caucus on Fox News — Full debate
August 11, 2011

Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia, Texas Rep. Ron Paul, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum, businessman and CEO of Godfather Pizza, Herman Cain and former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney.

MERCER GOP SUPER SATURDAY

2011-07-29T16:13:00.006-05:00

MERCER GOP SUPER SATURDAY

Saturday, July 30th

9:30am – 5:00pm

Call for your Candidates! Walk to Win!

Calling for your Candidates:

Shifts

9:30am – 12:00pm

12:00pm – 3:00pm

3:00pm – 5:00pm

Call At One Of Four Convenient Locations:

Mercer County GOP Headquarters, 1905 Rt 33, Hamilton

(Concord Shopping Center)

14th District Campaign Headquarters, 1905 Rt 33, Hamilton

TriCore, 117 North Gold Dr, Robbinsville

NJGOP, 125 W. State Street, Trenton

Walking to Win:

9:15am: Meet at GOPHQ: Candidates & volunteers will be meeting at 1905 Rt 33, Hamilton

9:30am: Walk to Win!: Candidates and volunteers will be knocking on doors and handing out literature

Please RSVP

Please RSVP with your name, phone number and whether you would like to Walk to Win or Call for your Candidates to Mallory Phelan at secretary@mercergop.com or

609-849-VOTE (8683)

NJ Congressman Chris Smith continues dialogue on international child abduction

2011-07-29T10:10:00.000-05:00

NJ Congressman Chris Smith continues dialogue on international child abduction
Trentonian
Friday, July 29, 2011
By SULAIMAN ABDUR-RAHMAN
sulaiman@trentonian.com

HAMILTON — Congressman Chris Smith on Thursday held another hearing on international child abduction and highlighted how at least 2,400 American children are still being held overseas as victims of kidnapping.

Building on the testimony from the initial May 24 hearing, Smith at Thursday's hearing zeroed in on Japan as being one of the many nations across the globe that harbors kidnapped American kids.

Smith called on President Barack Obama “to negotiate a memorandum of understanding with the Japanese” to ensure Japan returns all 156 abducted American youths who are known to be held in that country.

Two of those children belong to Iraq war veteran Michael Elias of Rutherford, Bergen County. His two kids were abducted with the help of the Japanese Consulate in contravention of U.S. court orders in 2008, according to Smith’s office.

Smith has been in the forefront of the international child abduction issue, having helped Monmouth County resident David Goldman get reunited with his son, Sean Goldman, who was abducted to Brazil.

Japan is not a signatory to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. Japan has suggested it may sign the convention, but Smith said Japan has to do more than that.

“Because the Hague Convention specifically precludes its protections to all existing abduction victims, entry into force — without an MOU — will likely result in lost momentum and no return of American children,” Smith said at the hearing on Capitol Hill.

Smith, R-Hamilton, is chairman of the House congressional panel that oversees international human rights. The congressman has proposed an amendment to the State Authorization bill suggesting the United States, through an MOU with Japan, “should seek the immediate return of all United States children wrongfully removed to or retained in Japan.”

Congress stands its ground

2011-07-28T12:30:00.001-05:00

Congress stands its ground
By George F. Will
July 25, 2011
Washington Post

Between 6 p.m. Friday and 4 p.m. Sunday, the nation began a constitutional course-correction. The current occupant’s vanity and naivete — a dangerous amalgam — are causing the modern presidency to buckle beneath the weight of its pretenses. And Congress is reasserting its responsibilities.

At his Friday news conference-cum-tantrum, Barack Obama imperiously summoned congressional leaders to his presence: “I’ve told” them “I want them here at 11 a.m.” By Saturday, his administration seemed to be cultivating chaos by suddenly postulating a new deadline: The debt-ceiling impasse must end before Asian markets opened Sunday evening Eastern time, lest the heavens fall.

Those markets opened; the heavens held. The faux deadline, reportedly invoked at a Saturday White House meeting by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who should resign, inevitably seeped into the media and invited overseas panic, thereby risking the nation’s currency, for brief tactical advantage.

Amid these tawdry episodes, House Speaker John Boehner signaled constitutional sanity regained: “Congress will forge a responsible path forward.” Congress. Obama has marginalized himself.

Inordinate self-regard is an occupational hazard of politics and part of the job description of the rhetorical presidency, this incessant tutor. Still, upon what meat doth this our current Caesar feed that he has grown so great that he presumes to command leaders of a coequal branch of government? He once boasted (June 3, 2008) that he could influence the oceans’ rise; he must be disabused of comparable delusions about controlling Congress.

When he was a lecturer on constitutional law, he evidently skipped the separation-of-powers doctrine. But, then, because this doctrine impedes the progressives’ goal of unleashing untrammeled government, they have long loathed it: Woodrow Wilson, the first president to criticize the American founding, considered the separation of powers the Constitution’s “radical defect.”

It has, however, rescued the nation from Obama’s preference for a “clean” debt-ceiling increase that would ignore the onrushing debt tsunami. There are 87 reasons for Obama’s temporary conversion of convenience to the cause of spending restraint — the 87 House Republican freshmen. Their inflexibility astonishes and scandalizes Washington because it reflects the rarity of serene fidelity to campaign promises.

Obama — a demagogue for an age of smooth surfaces; Huey Long with a better tailor — pretended Friday to wonder whether Republicans “can say yes to anything.” Well.

House Republicans said yes to “cut, cap and balance.” Senate Democrats, who have not produced a budget in more than 800 days, vowed to work all weekend debating this. But Friday they voted to table it, thereby ducking a straightforward vote on the only debt-reduction plan on paper, the only plan debated, the only plan to receive Democratic votes.

Obama’s last venture into public specificity was his February budget, which proposed accelerating the nation’s descent into debt. It was rejected by the Senate 97-0.

Although histrionically impatient with Republicans’ refusal to accept certain measures, Obama insists he will “not accept” a debt-ceiling deal that does not increase income taxes. Surely this is the meaning of his July 11 words: “I do not want, and will not accept, a deal in which . . . I’m able to keep hundreds of thousands of dollars in additional income that I don’t need.”

To understand Republican distrust of him, consider, from the many examples of his paltering with the truth, his July 15 news conference, wherein he veered from the subject of the debt ceiling to say “I’ve got three trade deals ready to go” yet they are “being held up because some folks don’t want to provide Trade Adjustment Assistance to people who may be displaced as a consequence of trade.” The facts are:

TAA, which has existed since 1962, enjoys bipartisan support. The 2009 stimulus increased it, supposedly temporarily, and it did revert to pre-stimulus levels in February. Now, however, Democrats suddenly insist that TAA’s stimulus levels be made permanent.

Obama’s wee mendacity about TAA illustrates the large stakes of the debt debate, which is a proxy for an epochal argument about the nature of American governance. Obama’s money gusher has driven federal spending from under 20 percent of GDP to almost 25 percent. Democrats consider this the new normal — until it becomes the base from which they launch their next surge of statism.

This fact refutes those who loftily dismiss the debt-ceiling debate as much ado about not very much. And those who are loftily contemptuous of today’s supposedly “dysfunctional” Washington have forgotten that the branches of government are supposed to be jealous rivals.

georgewill@washpost.com

Richard Kanka: NJ must cut spending on outside consultants

2011-07-27T10:35:00.002-05:00

Richard Kanka: NJ must cut spending on outside consultants
Trentonian
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
By SULAIMAN ABDUR-RAHMAN
sulaiman@trentonian.com

HAMILTON — New Jersey Senate candidate Richard Kanka is calling on the Legislature to cut spending on outside consultants and contractors after Monday’s Page One Trentonian report detailed potential waste and abuse in the state budget.

“At a time when middleclass workers and seniors need tax relief, the Legislature spent $1.9 billion on outside consultants since 2007,” Kanka said. “The state should utilize the employees we already have instead of duplicating costs by hiring outside consultants. We could then use the savings for tax relief.”

The Trentonian report exposed the state’s earmarking of roughly $413 million in the 2011-12 fiscal year to hire private-sector labor. State union leader Rae Roeder said, “They’re spending far too much money on consultants.”

“I would introduce legislation to increase oversight of this process so we can save tax dollars and reduce the reliance on outside contractors,” Kanka said.

Kanka is a Hamilton Republican and local school board member who gained national prominence by inspiring the creation of “Megan’s Law” following the 1994 rape and murder of his 7-year-old daughter.

He’s challenging Democratic state Sen. Linda Greenstein for her seat in the 14th Legislative District, which covers parts of Mercer and Middlesex counties.

Out of the Way, Please, Mr. President

2011-07-23T19:30:00.000-05:00

Out of the Way, Please, Mr. President
The Gang of Six puts forward some ideas worth pursuing.
By Peggy Noonan
Wall Street Journal
July 23, 2011

It's good, it represents progress, build from it. That would be a helpful approach to the Gang of Six proposal on the debt. Don't deep-six it because it's flawed. Flawless isn't going to happen. There will be a big election in 2012. A lot can be settled then, and after.

The Gang of Six -- three Democrats and three Republicans in the Senate -- this week put forward a plan aimed at reducing the national debt by almost $4 trillion over the next 10 years. It includes $500 billion in immediate cuts, and repeals a costly provision of ObamaCare. The plan would lower the top individual tax rate to 29%, push corporate tax rates down to 29% from 35%, and abolish the Alternative Minimum tax. On long-term spending the plan includes a legislative supermajority and sequester feature. In the words of a senator involved in the bargaining, "For the first time, we have some real teeth" in spending controls.

This is all pretty good. It moves the ball forward in the right ways.

As for the flaws: A lot is left up to committees and future action. A lot is left vague. But a critic of the plan, the Cato Institute's Dan Mitchell, highlighted with justice one of its central advantages: It "is not fueled by class-warfare resentment." These days that always comes as a surprise and a relief. And it might have come at a cost to the Democrats in the bargaining sessions.

The primary good of the plan is that it represents the work of three serious liberals and three serious conservatives who together are moving in the right direction, not the wrong one. They admit the spending crisis is a crisis; they appear to admit that we cannot, at least now, tax our way out of it. This seems small but isn't. Agreement on these essentials is an antidote to feelings of widespread public hopelessness: "Washington can't do anything." That hopelessness damages us more than we know, both at home and in the world. We have to look competent. We have to look like we can reform ourselves. The other day there was an apparently incorrect report that the Republicans and the president had neared a debt ceiling deal. The markets immediately jumped. Everyone wants Washington to work. People hunger for it.

The plan has already garnered a lot of opposition, much of it fair, but to quickly push it aside would be a real missed opportunity. Those who critique the plan can help it. Its cuts in entitlements and its attempts to reform them are unclear and appear insufficient. If the Senate passed a final proposal along Gang of Six lines, House Republicans would have to make the bill more concrete, more reliable in its mechanisms. And they'd probably have to make deeper cuts. Overshadowing all negotiations is the persistent threat of a credit downgrade. The senator at the bargaining table said that if a final bill doesn't contain "at least $4 trillion in cuts," we will get a downgrade, which would carry costs greater than the cuts in the Gang of Six plan.

Attempts to find a final compromise are delicate, with a lot of moving pieces. But the Gang of Six proposal is cause for encouragement. It could not be turned into specific legislation quickly. Gang of Six member Kent Conrad said Thursday morning it could take six months to get it all done and through the appropriate committees. But President Obama signaled this week, for the first time, that he might back a temporary debt ceiling increase to allow work to continue.

That's good. But a note on his efforts in the drama. It is time for the president to get out of the way.

For the longest time he wouldn't engage, and now he's engaged. For the longest time he didn't care about spending, and now he cares about spending. Good, both in terms of policy and for him. But his decision to become engaged has become a decision to dominate, to have his face in front of the television with his news conferences, pronouncements, and what his communications people are probably calling his "ownership" of any final agreement. He's trying to come across as the boss, the indispensable man, the leader. And, of course, the reasonable one.

That's all very nice and part of Political Positioning 101, but at this point it's not helping. He's becoming box-office poison. His numbers are falling. The RealClearPolitics composite job approval poll rating has him down six points since June 2, when the debt ceiling crisis began. That fall, from 52% to 46%, exactly tracks his heightened media presence and his increased attempts to be seen as dominant. Public Policy Polling, a Democratic firm, said that if he ran for president today he'd lose, that his job numbers are "worse than they appear," and that he continues to have real trouble with undecided voters.

And if you've watched him lately, you know why. When he speaks on the debt negotiations, he is not only extremely boring, with airy and bromidic language -- really they are soul-killing, his talking points -- but he never seems to be playing it straight. He always seems to be finagling, playing the angles in some higher game that only he gets. In 2½ years, he has reached the point that took George W. Bush five years to reach: People aren't listening anymore.

The other day he announced the Gang of Six agreement with words that enveloped the plan in his poisonous embrace: "I wanted to give folks a quick update on the progress that we're making." We're. He has "continued to urge both Democrats and Republicans to come together." What would those little devils do without Papa? "The good news is that today a group of senators . . . put forward a proposal that is broadly consistent with the approach that I've urged." I've urged. Me, me, me.

That approach includes "shared sacrifice, and everybody is giving up something." He was like a mother coming in and cheerily announcing: "Dinner's served! Less for everybody!"

We're trying to begin a comeback, not a famine. We're trying to take actions that will allow us to grow.

He's like a walking headache. He's probably triggering Michele Bachmann's migraines.

The Gang of Six members themselves should have been given the stage to make their own announcement, and their own best case.

The president, if he is seriously trying to avert a debt crisis, should stay in his office, meet with members, and work the phones, all with a new humility, which would be well received. It is odd how he patronizes those with more experience and depth in national affairs.

He should keep his face off TV. He should encourage, cajole, work things through, be serious, get a responsible deal, and then re-emerge with joy and the look of a winner as he jointly announces it to the nation. Then his people should leak that he got what he wanted, the best possible deal, and the left has no idea the ruin he averted and the thanks they owe him.

For now, for his sake and the sake of an ultimate plan, he should choose Strategic Silence. Really, recent presidents forget to shut up. They lose sight of how grating they are.

Greenstein missed chance to show real leadership

2011-07-16T12:56:00.000-05:00

Greenstein missed chance to show real leadership
Times of Trenton
July 15, 2011

I am responding to the letter "Greenstein's record supports workers — and they support her" (June 30), written by Sen. Linda Greenstein's spokesperson, which missed the point of the debate over the pension and benefits bill.

Benefits changes were forced on public employees because, for more than a decade, politicians such as Sen. Greenstein, D-Monroe, refused to insist that the state pay into the pension system. It took great fortitude and courageous leadership by Gov. Chris Christie to save the pension system so that generations of public workers, teachers, police officers and firefighters will be able to collect their pensions.

Sen. Greenstein could have stood up for public employees by making sure the state set aside money to protect their retirement. Instead, she voted for state budgets that did not make the needed payments into the pension system, which is the reason we are in this financial mess.

Anyone can speak at a rally, but protecting the pension fund would have required the senator to show leadership during the budget process for the past decade. Like other state lawmakers, Sen. Greenstein voted to spend money without planning for the future.

I find it odd that Sen. Greenstein needs a professional spokesperson to write letters supporting her. I hope that this November, everyone who is tired of the high taxes and broken promises from Trenton will join me in sending the Legislature a message by voting out the incumbents who continue to raise taxes on the hard-working residents of New Jersey.

-- Joseph R. Abbott,
Hamilton

Kanka says competing Caylee's Laws prove political system is broken

2011-07-15T18:18:00.002-05:00

Kanka says competing Caylee's Laws prove political system is broken
By Darryl R. Isherwood
July 15th, 2011
politicsnj.com

The introduction of competing “Caylee’s Law” bills in the state legislature is proof that the political system is broken, said the man who was one of the driving forces behind the sex offender registry that is now law in all 50 states.

Richard Kanka, whose daughter Megan was murdered by a convicted sex offender, spurring the passage of Megan’s Law, said if legislators from competing parties can’t even agree on how best to protect children, something is wrong with the process. Kanka is running for state Senate in the 14th District.

“The Legislature is so partisan, they can't even agree on a bill to protect missing children. The broken political process in Trenton proves that it’s time for new people. We have the same problem with job creation and property tax rebates, everyone in the Legislature tries to politicize the issue and no one works to solve problems,” he said. “Megan’s Law was about uniting governors and legislators from both parties in order to protect our children from predators. We had help from Republicans and Democrats because the goal was to do the right thing, regardless of who got the credit.”

So far, Trenton lawmakers have introduced three bills that would make it a crime to fail to report a death or for a parent or guardian to fail to report a missing child within 24 hours.

Democrats were first out of the box with a bill that would make failing to report a fourth-degree crime and Republicans countered with stiffer penalties. That first bill is co-sponsored by Kanka’s opponent in the upcoming election, state Sen. Linda Greenstein, (D-14), of Plainsboro. A third bill was heralded by sponsor Assemblyman Ralph Caputo, (D-28), as the most stringent yet, as it would close the reporting window to 12 hours.

The bills are all in response to the case of Caylee Anthony, a 2-year-old Florida girl who disappeared in June 2008. Her mother, Casey Anthony, did not report her daughter missing for a month. Casey Anthony was indicted on murder charges in her daughter’s death.

Anthony was acquitted of murder earlier this month, but lawmakers throughout the nation have rushed to introduce laws to make failure to report a missing child a crime.

Congressional redistricting by the numbers

2011-07-14T15:41:00.002-05:00

Congressional redistricting by the numbers
By Darryl R. Isherwood
July 13th, 2011
politikernj.com

New Jersey’s Congressional redistricting effort presents the highest of stakes for one U.S. Representative this year as the state is slated to lose one member of the delegation, dropping the representation to 12.

Speculation is rampant over which congressman is in the most danger of losing his seat and who might be safe when the game of musical chairs stops in January. The current makeup is seven Democrats and six Republicans so the chances of an agreement that all sides can live with are scarce, sources tell PolitickerNJ.

The commission has not yet met as a whole and the deadline for the new map is still six months away, but Interviews with sources on both sides of the aisle as well as census numbers released earlier this year hold clues as to how each side may proceed once the 13th member of the commission is named. The tie-breaking member could be named as early as Friday but will more likely be chosen by the Supreme Court next month.

Every district in the state needs to add residents to conform to the ideal population size of 732,658. Since the districts were drawn 10 years ago, District 4, which has been represented by Republican U.S. Rep. Chris Smith for more than two decades, has grown the most, followed by District 12, which is represented by U.S. Rep. Holt Rush Holt (D-12). Both cover the central portion of the state.

The process promises to be parochial as members will no doubt lobby to save their own seats while also trying to boost their respective parties in Washington, D.C.

Republicans familiar with the thinking of the GOP team say their focus will likely be on the Northeastern portion of the state, where Democratic U.S. Reps. Albio Sires, (D-13), Donald Payne, (D-10), Steve Rothman, (D-9), and Bill Pascrell, (D-8) control portions of Essex, Passaic, Hudson, Bergen and Union counties.

GOP sources say the cluster of four districts presents the most obvious place to consolidate. District 13, which is predominantly Hispanic, and District 10, which is predominantly black, are considered virtually untouchable because they are protected under the Voting Rights Act.

But District 13 needs to add 47,000 residents without upsetting the demographic mix, while District 10 needs an additional 98,000 residents, roughly half of them black. One way to do that, Republican sources say, is to raid Districts 8 and 9. But cherry-picking those districts, which each need roughly 72,000 additional residents to bring them up to the ideal size of 732,658, would create havoc elsewhere, Republican sources say, leaving a combination of the two the most favorable outcome for the GOP.

The argument is strengthened, they say, by census data that show that area of the state has not grown as fast as portions farther south. Payne’s District has lost residents since it was drawn, while Districts 8 and 9 have grown more slowly than any of the remaining 10 districts. Another GOP school of thought has Republicans targeting U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, (D-6), who as one source said, "hasn't made many friends in the delegation."

Democrats have a different take, according to two sources connected to the Congressional delegation. One Democratic map, sources say, would combine Districts 5 and 11 and pit U.S. Reps. Rodney Frelinghuysen, (R-11), and Scott Garrett, (R-5), in a Republican primary. The thinking goes that New Jersey is a blue state so the delegation should reflect a Democratic majority. Combining those districts would allow Districts 8 and 9 to move north into Bergen County and potentially south into Union to gain the needed population.

One Democratic source said Democrats could focus on any of the three Western New Jersey districts, including some combination that includes the 7th, represented by Republican Leonard Lance.

But all sources say a compromise between the two sides could feature a combination of the 12th and the 7th Districts, which would pit Holt against Lance. Lance is serving only his second term in the seat and is the second most junior member of the delegation behind freshman Rep. Jon Runyan.

What’s more, Lance’s home town of Clinton Township abuts the 12th District, making the map less destructive to the remaining 11 districts. Democrats say that district should remain one that favors Holt in order to reflect the state’s blue leanings.

A second so-called compromise map that has been discussed is one that would pit Pascrell and Frelinghuysen in a combined district, which Democrats say should be on that votes about 55 percent Democratic, again to reflect the state's leftward tilt.

But any speculation at this stage of the game is just that, warned one attorney connected to the Democratic team, and does not reflect the thinking of the commission.

Bill Castner, who is serving as a counsel to the Democratic team, cautioned that it’s still too early in the process to make any predictions. The commission, he said, has not even looked at any maps to date.

“It's not very wise to forecast map strategy or outcomes at this stage, primarily because the independent member of the Commission has yet to be named, hearings have not been held, and the deadline is not until mid-January,” he said. “It’s phrenology at this point. One lesson, though, from state redistricting, is that it is very risky for either side to overreach.”

The members of the commission from both sides of the aisle must vote on a 13th member by Friday. If they cannot agree, the names of the two highest vote getters will be forwarded to the state Supreme Court, which has until Aug. 10 to choose between the two.

District Current Population Population needed

1 669,169 63,489

2 692,205 40,453

3 680,341 52,317

4 724,596 8,062

5 666,551 66,107

6 668,806 63,852

7 672,885 59,773

8 660,424 72,234

9 661,379 71,279

10 634,343 98,315

11 674,349 58,309

12 701,881 30,777

13 684,965 47,693

Proud to start campaign for Ewing council seat

2011-07-13T12:55:00.001-05:00

Proud to start campaign for Ewing council seat

Times of Trenton
July 12, 2011

I’d like to express my appreciation for the well-organized Ewing Independence Day parade. I am a lifelong Ewing resident and have attended many town parades, as a participant representing Little League, Cub Scouts and Boy Scouts, as well as a spectator.

Last week, I enjoyed the opportunity to introduce myself to my fellow community members as the Republican candidate for the Ewing Town Council election this November. The positive response and encouragement made me feel very proud of our community and humbled to have the opportunity to represent it. Flanked by my family and close friends, my spirits were buoyed by the friendly, albeit short (due to the fast pace of the parade) exchanges I had.

In the coming months, I look forward to reaching out to the residents I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting. Among my main goals will be expanding on my ideas of greater fiscal responsibility of our council and creating the opportunity for real property-tax relief. Also, I seek to offer balance and equal-mindedness to the present all-Democratic council and administration.

-- John Cifelli,
Ewing
The writer is the Republican candidate for Ewing Township Council (john@johncifellinow.com).
www.johncifellinow.com

Letter to the Editor: Mayor Bencivengo says candidate is talking hooey

2011-07-09T15:08:00.005-05:00

Letter to the Editor: Mayor Bencivengo says candidate is talking hooey
Saturday, July 9, 2011
Trentonian

Dear Editor,

I find it somewhat amazing that my opponent can actually believe any of the things she wrote in her article of July 7. First and foremost she has tried, as the local Democrats have in the past, to blame the 2007 budget year tax hike on my administration. Need I remind my opponent that it was her party that created a multi-million dollar deficit that even the State of NJ, which was controlled by her party at the time, acknowledged? Need I remind my opponent of the very gimmicks that got us into the financial mess that I inherited Things like only budgeting for 25 pay periods instead of the 26 that Hamilton has. How about claiming tax revenues collected for the Board of Education as revenue but not including it on the spending side even though all $5+ million had to be given to the Board. Who can forget the $5 million dollar deficit depicted in the Annual Financial Statement of Fiscal Year 2007? I won't even mention a multi-million dollar PILOT to a connected developer and of course we can always revisit Klockner Woods. I could go on and on but why talk about a dark period in Hamilton's history? I do ask, however, where was my opponent when all of that was going on?

In her article she identifies programs like HAMSTAT, Pot Hole Pete and Snow Plow Sal as snappy and as if they are all different but just a little research would have told her that they are all part of the same HAMSTAT service, a service that responded to over 66,838 citizen inquiries in the first year of its existence and is held up as a model statewide for citizen service. She even criticizes the newsletter, The Scoop, in spite of the fact that it is completely paid for by PSE&G. I guess she'd rather have the taxpayers pay to issue it.

She talks about variances yet under the previous administration 40% more variances were issued as compared to the last four years under my administration and that is a matter of public record. During those years I and the current Council were out in front demanding that fewer variances be granted especially for residential developments on land previously zoned for commercial use, where was my opponent?

She writes that we need a plan to move Hamilton forward yet it has been my administration that has given Hamilton its first Master Plan revision in nearly 30 years. Where was my opponent during those years?

She writes that we provide tax incentives for new development which is blatantly false because it is illegal. Please let her name one developer that received a “tax incentive” from my administration. Again, with just a small amount of due diligence my opponent would know that. Of course this is the same person who, at a Planning Board meeting, indicated that she advocated more housing and less retail. Really?

She writes that we need to focus on areas such as Rt. 33 yet over a year ago my administration, with the assistance of the Hamilton Partnership, held a planning session called the RT. 33 2020 Symposium. It was a planning session attended by numerous residents and owners of RT 33 businesses of all sizes. My opponent knows this because she attended and participated in that session. Did she conveniently forget? It was from that session that zoning changes have been recommended in the Master Plan that my opponent advocated. Were we wrong to listen to her and the other participants?

She talks about a plan she submitted to me and claims it was totally ignored and never considered. But the fact is that we had two meetings and numerous written discussions about her plan and some of the zoning changes recommended for the Mercerville area were changes she advocated. Did she get everything she wanted? No. because part of her plan was to block off Rt 33 in front of her business and we did not consider that viable because RT 33 is a State Highway. I will add though that just a few years earlier the Mercerville area where her business is located received a $55000 beautification grant from the State of NJ through the Township.

She also, once again, brings up pedestrian bike paths and walkways and says we need a plan but ignores the fact that the Master Plan contains a Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as well as a Traffic Circulation Plan and it can be viewed on the township website. And, yes, once again my opponent knows this because she and one of her Council running mates attended the Planning Board meeting where the plan was introduced. In fact, not only did they attend but both actually made comments that evening endorsing some of the recommendations.

She writes that we should ensure that our Police and Fire personnel have the latest technology. Well I can attest that our police department, which I view as the best in the State of NJ, makes technology requests every budget year and seldom if ever are those requests denied. I can't speak for the fire personnel for, as my opponent should know, their budgets are controlled by elected commissioners in 9 different districts and are voted on by the residents of each of those districts but I certainly agree that they should have all the tools necessary to protect our citizens and themselves at all times.

In conclusion, I hope that the misinformation in my opponent's article is not a harbinger of the type of campaign she plans to run. I trust that this campaign will be about new ideas and proposals and not personal attacks or political spin. I have my doubts but I pledge that I will run on my record. I believe it is a record of accomplishment, one that I'm proud of, and ask that the citizens of Hamilton remember where we were a short four years ago as compared to where we are today. I am more than willing to trust their judgment.

John F Bencivengo
Mayor Hamilton Township

Bam recruits Corzine to woo back Wall $t.

2011-07-05T13:32:00.000-05:00

Bam recruits Corzine to woo back Wall $t.
By JOSH MARGOLIN
NYPost
Last Updated: 10:35 AM, July 5, 2011

President Obama is desperately putting his Wall Street stock in an unlikely old buddy.

The beleaguered president has recruited former Goldman Sachs head honcho Jon Corzine to shore up re-election funds from the banking industry, which is furious over Obama's financial regulations.

Corzine, the former governor of New Jersey who was blasted out of office by Republican Chris Christie in 2009, has attended secret meetings with the president and has been working on Obama's 2012 campaign for months, The Post has learned.

The Democrat, who now leads Manhattan-based brokerage MF Global, has been tasked with scraping up the very little banking-industry support Obama can still get.

And, like any good executive, Corzine is looking out for his own bottom line.

Success could resuscitate his political career with a top post -- such as treasury secretary or a key ambassadorship -- if there is a second Obama term.

Obama campaigned heavily for Corzine in his failed re-election bid, calling him "our Wall Street guy."

Corzine's name popped up on an attendance list for a controversial and secret White House sit-down with leaders of New York's financial sector late last month. He has also aggressively worked the phone lines and the cocktail-party circuit.

And in the last few months, Corzine hosted a high-end fund-raiser at his Fifth Avenue home for Obama.

He even secretly organized a meet-and-greet at the Four Seasons for key finance-industry execs and Obama's new chief of staff, former banker Bill Daley.

"We need our donors back," one Obama campaign official said. "It's a tough fight."

Many Wall Streeters are fuming over White House rhetoric painting them as "fat cats" who need to pay more taxes.

Top executives -- who contributed millions to Obama in 2008 -- have so far retaliated by closing their wallets to him.

The Obama campaign declined to comment.

But Corzine spokesman Josh Zeitz enthusiastically said the former governor "intends to lend whatever help he can."

The GOP scoffed at the alliance.

"It is no surprise [Obama] is turning to surrogates like Gov. Corzine," said Republican National Committee spokesman Ryan Tronovitch.

"Unfortunately, our campaigner-in-chief has shown that his priority is keeping his job instead of putting forth serious policies that will get New Yorkers back to work."

God Bless America

2011-07-04T00:14:00.000-05:00

Bill to remove sexism from NJ laws heads to gov.

2011-07-03T21:12:00.002-05:00

Bill to remove sexism from NJ laws heads to gov.
Trentonian
Sunday, July 3, 2011

TRENTON, (AP) — Legislation that would repeal several sexist and obsolete state laws in New Jersey has been sent to Gov. Chris Christie's desk.

Both houses of the state Legislature have approved the bipartisan measure, which addresses laws that were well-intentioned at the time they were approved but are no longer relevant.

Among them is a 19th-century law guaranteeing property rights to married women. Officials note that those rights are covered by the state constitution and anti-discrimination laws guaranteeing equal protection.

It was not known if or when Christie would consider the measure, which was passed by the Assembly in late March and in the Senate on Wednesday. His office hasn't commented on the governor's plans, and Christie hasn't addressed the matter.

Proponents say outdated laws, if not removed, have the potential to prove harmful.

One of the measures that would be repealed by the bill is a law that says a man and woman must wait at least 72 hours to get married unless the man was arrested for "bastardy, rape, fornication or of having had carnal knowledge of an unmarried female." In that case, the law allows the waiting period to be waived.

Another law targeted for repeal says a woman forfeits her property rights to her husband if she's been "ravished," unless the husband forgives her and allows her to live with him.

"It's bad enough these laws existed at all, much less remain on the books," said Sen. Jennifer Beck, R-Monmouth, who co-sponsored the measure in that chamber with Sen. Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen. They developed the legislation after noticing the antiquated and, at times, demeaning references to women still contained in laws that date to the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

"Our society has moved on from an era where the rights of women were deliberately limited by the government, and it is time the law books do the same," Beck said.

Similar views were voiced by Assemblywoman Linda Stender, D-Scotch Plains, who was among the measure's primary sponsors in that chamber. She compared it to the constitutional amendment that voters approved in 2007, which eliminated insensitive phrasing in the state constitution that was aimed at barring people with limited mental capacity from voting.

The amendment removed language characterizing such people as "idiots" and "insane" and replaced it with a phrase explaining how people deemed by a judge "to lack the capacity to understand the act of voting" could be barred from casting ballots.

"In much the same way we updated our laws to eliminate language that is offensive to those with mental illness or developmental disabilities, we're doing the same for women with this law," Stender said.

Other primary sponsors in the Assembly were Democrats Valerie Vainieri Huttle of Englewood, Ruben Ramos Jr. of Hoboken, Annette Quijano of Union, Connie Wagner of Paramus and Joan Voss of Fort Lee.

Legislative brats, adult supervision

2011-07-03T07:03:00.000-05:00

TRENTONIAN EDITORIAL: Legislative brats, adult supervision

Saturday, July 2, 2011
By The Trentonian

Somebody had to provide adult supervision at the N.J. State House, Gov. Christie pointed out, so he stepped forward to be the grown up among the brats.

The brats — the Democratic majority of the state legislature — had decided it would be a really awesome election-year prank to add about a billion dollars to the new state budget.

What a hoot! Especially when you tack on all of that spending at the eleventh hour, just before the budgetary deadline.

And — even more hilarious — you do it at the very point in time when the state is struggling to climb out of a bottomless pit of a fiscal hole and revive its faltering economy.

What a hoot indeed! Surely you’re already sniggering if not guffawing.

And here’s the really diabolical part of the prank: You make sure that all of that extra spending consists of sacred-cow stuff. You know, appropriations for children, seniors, education.

Cost, of course, is no object — especially not when you’re being charitable and compassionate with other people’s money.

The object is to force Christie to line-item veto all of this sacred-cow munificence and make him look like (tee-hee, tee-hee) The Grinch Who Stole Christmas.

Doubled over in laughter yet?

Wait, here comes really ingenious part of the prank: You thrown in a tax hike on millionaires. You know, successful people. Who needs ’em anyway? People who already pay a hugely disproportionate share of the state income tax. People whose businesses and/or investments provide jobs.

You force Christie to veto this tax and make him look like he cares more about fat cats than the little people.

Now you’re out of breath from uncontrollable laughter, right?

What a madcap bunch, those Democrat brats in the legislature!

But their prank fizzled when Christie — without a trace of embarrassment — took out his pen and deleted all of the extra sacred-cow goodies from the budget, plus drew a line through the tax hike on millionaires.

Outcome: It was the big guy who seemed to derive all of the mirth from the prank. “They wanted to embarass me,” said Christie. “But look at me, I’m beyond embarrassment.”

The embarrassment is that the Democratic legislative majority evidently believes that its fellow Garden State Democrats are such an easily gulled bunch of nitwits that they can be hornswoggled into thinking that a state budget consisting of “only” about $42 billion of annual spending including state and federal tax dollars is chintzy and cruelly so. That a $1.05 billion appropriation for the Dept. of Children and Families, a $5.29 billion appropriation for the Dept. of Human Services and a $1.26 billion appropriation for the Dept. of Health and Senior Services (all of which the Christie budget provides) demonstrate monstrous stinginess — indeed, as one top Democrat suggested, a mean-spirited indifference to human suffering.

As for the millionaire tax prank, the legislative Democrats apparently thought the existing revenue measures in the Christie budget — $24,654,662,000 from 14 “major” taxes including a sales and income tax and $2,664,059,000 from nearly 280 “miscellaneous taxes, fees and revenues” — plus $12,128,463,665 in federal tax dollars — could be passed off as piddling sums.

The next time the legislative Democrats are in a mood to make mischief, they might do better to pull off some other prank such as scrawling graffiti on the State House dome. Even that would be a notch up in cleverness and would show more maturity.

N.J. Senate approves nomination of Anne Patterson to state Supreme Court

2011-06-27T17:07:00.000-05:00

N.J. Senate approves nomination of Anne Patterson to state Supreme Court
Published: Monday, June 27, 2011
Ginger Gibson/Statehouse Bureau

TRENTON — After a more than year-long standoff, the state Senate voted to approve the nomination of Anne Patterson to the state Supreme Court.

Voting just before 10 p.m., the Senate finally gave approval to a nomination Gov. Chris Christie made last year when he announced he would not reappoint former Justice John Wallace.

The decision to force out Wallace, also from Gloucester County, infuriated supporters and Democratic lawmakers. They argued that Christie ignored a 63-year-old tradition by refusing to reappoint a sitting justice, and that he sacrificed the court's only black justice to reconfigure the bench with judges who more closely share his views.

Senate President Stephen Sweeney said he wouldn't give Patterson a hearing until the term Wallace would have held expired.

A year later and after a shifting of seats, which had Patterson nominated for a seat currently held by Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto and Christie agreeing to let Wallace's seat remain empty until next year, Patterson finally got a hearing.

She won't take the bench until September, when Rivera-Soto will vacate his seat.

Richard Kanka letter: NJ bennies bill a result of irresponsibility

2011-06-25T11:10:00.000-05:00

Richard Kanka letter: NJ bennies bill a result of irresponsibility
Trentonian
Saturday, June 25, 2011
By RICHARD KANKA

I would have voted against the pension and benefits bill that was approved by the Legislature on Thursday.

As a union member, I believe in collective bargaining. The Legislature used back room deals to negotiate this bill, and I believe that Trenton politicians going behind closed doors to cut deals is never the solution to our problems.

The Legislature passed this bill as a remedy for the $110 billion unfunded pension and health care liability. That debt, which threatens the financial security of taxpayers, public employees, and retirees, didn’t spring up overnight. For ten years, Senator Greenstein voted for budgets that did not fully fund the pension system.

A complete lack of leadership in the Legislature led us down this path. It is hypocritical for legislators like Senator Greenstein to vote against funding the pension system one day and then claim they support public workers the next day.

The hypocrisy is even worse when you consider that Senator Greenstein voted to keep devastating restrictions in the bill that would limit workers’ access to doctors and hospital care in Pennsylvania and New York.

After 11 years of irresponsible decisions, we need new leadership in Trenton.

Richard Kanka is a candidate for State Senate in the 14th Legislative District.

The Lone Star Jobs Surge

2011-06-11T22:48:00.000-05:00

The Lone Star Jobs Surge
Wall Street Journal
June 10, 2011

The Texas model added 37% of all net U.S. jobs since the recovery began.

Richard Fisher, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, dropped by our offices this week and relayed a remarkable fact: Some 37% of all net new American jobs since the recovery began were created in Texas. Mr. Fisher's study is a lesson in what works in economic policy—and it is worth pondering in the current 1.8% growth moment.

Using Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, Dallas Fed economists looked at state-by-state employment changes since June 2009, when the recession ended. Texas added 265,300 net jobs, out of the 722,200 nationwide, and by far outpaced every other state. New York was second with 98,200, Pennsylvania added 93,000, and it falls off from there. Nine states created fewer than 10,000 jobs, while Maine, Hawaii, Delaware and Wyoming created fewer than 1,000. Eighteen states have lost jobs since the recovery began.

The data are even more notable because they're calculated on a "sum of states" basis, which the BLS does not use because they can have sampling errors. Using straight nonfarm payroll employment, Texas accounts for 45% of net U.S. job creation. Modesty is not typically considered a Texas virtue, but the results speak for themselves.

Texas is also among the few states that are home to more jobs than when the recession began in December 2007. The others are North Dakota, Alaska and the District of Columbia. If that last one sounds like an outlier at first, remember the government boom of the Obama era, which has helped loft D.C. payrolls 18,000 jobs above the pre-crisis status quo. Even so, Texas is up 30,800.

What explains this Lone Star success? Texas is a big state, but its population of 24.7 million isn't that much bigger than the Empire State, about 19.5 million. California is a large state too—36.9 million—and yet it's down 11,400 jobs. Mr. Fisher argues that Texas is doing so well relative to other states precisely because it has rejected the economic model that now prevails in Washington, and we'll second that notion.

Mr. Fisher notes that all states labor under the same Fed monetary policy and interest rates and federal regulation, but all states have not performed equally well. Texas stands out for its free market and business-friendly climate.

Capital—both human and investment—is highly mobile, and it migrates all the time to the places where the opportunities are larger and the burdens are lower. Texas has no state income tax. Its regulatory conditions are contained and flexible. It is fiscally responsible and government is small. Its right-to-work law doesn't impose unions on businesses or employees. It is open to global trade and competition: Houston, San Antonio and El Paso are entrepôts for commerce, especially in the wake of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Based on his conversations with CEOs and other business leaders, Mr. Fisher says one of Texas's huge competitive advantages is its ongoing reform of the tort system, which has driven litigation costs to record lows. He also cited a rule in place since 1998 in the backwash of the S&L debacle that limits mortgage borrowing to 80% of the appraised value of a home. Like a minimum down payment, this reduces overleveraging and means Texas wasn't hurt as badly by the housing crash as other states.

Texan construction employment has contracted by 2.3% since the end of the recession, along with manufacturing (a 1.8% decline) and information (-8.4%). But growth in other areas has surpassed these losses. Professional and business services accounted for 22.9% of the total jobs added, health care for 30.5% and trade and energy for 10.6%.

The Texas economy has grown on average by 3.3% a year over the last two decades, compared with 2.6% for the U.S. overall. Yet the core impulse of Obamanomics is to make America less like Texas and more like California, with more government, more unions, more central planning, higher taxes. That the former added 37% of new U.S. jobs suggests what an historic mistake this has been.