If American’s are interested in the Democrat’s “Better Way”, they might want to take a look at New Jersey. Democrats control both houses of the state’s legislature and the governor’s mansion.

Just a few New Jersey highlights:

$6 Billion budget deficit
$30 Billion in debt
Highest property taxes in the nation
Job growth lags the nation
Highest per student spending in the nation – SAT scores lower than the national average
Highest health insurance premiums in the nation
Bankrupt Roads and Mass Transportation Fund
Bankrupt Schools Construction Fund

Our Governor Jon Corzine summed up the state of New Jersey when he said: "We're pretty much broke.”

New Jersey, Come See For Yourself! That’s the new state slogan. Really.

Associate Supreme Court Justice
Samuel A. Alito

Senate Confirmation vote: 58- 42

By a vote of 72-25, the Senate halted debate on Judge Samuel Alito’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, almost assuring Alito’s confirmation tomorrow.

New Jersey’s Senators, Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez joined the attempted filibuster, by voting against cloture, which if successful would have denied Alito a vote by the Senate.

Lautenberg’s and Menendez’ vote to deny Alito a vote strikes us as a vote against the “little guy” who worked hard, played it straight and made good, in favor of the moneyed special interests.

Menendez, a man who sits in the Senate without the benefit of winning an election, casts his first major vote in the Senate against one of his own constituents. This no doubt will be the first of many votes against the wishes and the best interests of his fellow Jerseyans. Thankfully, we’ll have the opportunity to return the favor in November.

C-SPAN and Opinion Journal tallies both indicate Senators Lautenberg and Menendez plan to vote no on confirming Judge Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.

Update: It’s official, Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez will vote against the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito.

Although both senators spoke harshly of Alito's judicial record, they found room to praise him as a fellow New Jerseyan and as an intelligent man.

"But it is not enough to come from New Jersey - the test is- will you represent the values of New Jersey and this nation on the highest court in the land?" Menendez said.

Brother, ‘the values' of New Jersey?

Update II - More Commentary from Bench Memos:

Laughable Lautenberg:
The senior Senator from New Jersey is a fairly comic figure, trying to oppose home state Judge Alito. . . Lautenberg's reading some speech that sounds like it was written by a 23 year-old legislative assistant who hasn't read all the way through the Constitution.

Pathetic Menendez:
Not to be outdone by the senior Senator from Judge Alito's home state of New Jersey, junior Senator Bob Menendez has now taken the floor. The incongruence of his two-faced statement — attempting simultaneously to pander to his home state and to the liberal Left that controls Democrat campaign purse strings — is stunning.

Menendez says he "takes pride in the honor that's been bestowed on a fellow New Jerseyan," noting that he too is the "son of immigrants" and that Judge Alito's "story of seizing opportunity and working hard" is "a story close to my heart."

But when it comes to a Supreme Court nominee, he says: "It's not where you come from that matters, but where you will take the nation."

Menendez thinks that Supreme Court Justices are supposed to "take the nation" someplace: he, like the liberal Left opposing Judge Alito, doesn't understand that under our Constitution, courts are not supposed to "take us" anywhere.

The two-faced pandering flips back and forth so fast, it's hard to keep up with it:

Pandering to New Jersey: Judge Alito has "a keen intellect."

Pandering to the Left: But he can't replace Justice O'Connor, the deciding vote "protecting our rights and freedoms" (he got that line from Ralph Neas!).

Pandering to New Jersey: "I take pride" in the nomination of Judge Alito. "He's a decent, intelligent, accomplished man."

Pandering to the Left: But Judge Alito would "overturn a woman's right to contol her own body," "side with corporations over African Americans," "favor the concentration of unlimited power in the hands of the President," and "make it impossible for a person has been discriminated against to take his or her case to court."

But really, he's very proud of the decent, intelligent, and accomplished Judge Alito!

Too bad there are not more New Jersey Democrats like Debra Burlingame. Perhaps there are and we just don’t get to read or hear their views.

Dan Riehl says the Lib Fringe Full-o-Bluster On Filibuster:

The usual band of losers - Kennedy, Kerry and Gore are leading the charge. ... Hillary ET AL are signing on because they need the pocket book of the Left for 2006 and any ambitions they are entertaining for 08. Unfortunately, it's really just another instance of liberal politicians willing to abandon anything that resembles principle to realize a short-sighted gain.

There is absolutely no question as regards Alito's fitness for the post. But then being qualified never means anything to the Left, so long as you're willing to sell out principle and the Constitution to help them forward a losing cause.

As Wizbang has pointed out today:

The American people support Judge Alito by comfortable margins in every poll out there: FOX News/Opinion Dynamics has him up by 15, CBS News/New York Times has him up by the same margin, and CNN/USA Today/Gallup says that 54 percent of the American people favor confirmation.

So, where do New Jersey’s Senators stand with one day to go before the vote on Alito? They won’t say. But Roberto writes:

Lautenberg and Menendez are not going to vote for Sam Alito. The filibuster question is different since support for the obstructing move is symbolic. Lautenberg may not support a filibuster, only because he did say such nice things about Alito when he introduced him to the senate. Just a hunch on my part. Menendez needs all the help from the liberal/progressives he can get in what may be a close race in November. My guess is he will support a filibuster.

As we previously posted, a recent Rasmussen poll found in New Jersey, 53% favor Alito’s confirmation, 28% oppose. So what’s up the New Jersey’s Senators Lautenberg and Menendez? It’s all about posturing for the radical left to milk them for campaign contributions and assuming by the time November rolls around no one else will remember their vote against Alito. Let’s hope this time they figured wrong.

Lynne Strickland, Executive Director of the Garden State Coalition of Schools has quoted in this past Thursday’s Star-Ledger as saying:

"Property taxpayers are overwhelmed, while state aid has not been increased for five years."

That is an interesting comment that needs to be challenged. State Income tax revenue has grown from $7.035 billion in fiscal year 2000-2001 to $10 billion in fiscal year 2005-2006. That’s a 30% increase in five years and it has been distributed to municipalities in what is called school aid.

Governor Corzine’s Budget and Reengineering Government Transition Policy Group released a report this past Friday that said:

School aid is a nearly $10 billion item, growing significantly every year. The budget problem cannot be solved until the State deals with controlling education costs.

Strickland should have said school aid has increased by at least 30 % to the 31 Abbott School districts over the past five years, but state aid for schools in the rest of the state has been steadily decreasing. Parity in per student spending has long since been achieved in New Jersey’s “needy schools”, with per pupil spending 30-35% greater than a non-Abbott School counterpart in the same county.

To be more precise, property tax relief (school aid) has increased by 30% in the past five years, but only a select group has benefited. New Jersey’s Constitution mandates that 100 percent of the revenue collected from New Jersey’s income tax must be deposited in the Property Tax Relief Fund to be used solely for the purpose of reducing or offsetting property taxes. Specifically, income tax revenue must be distributed to reduce the school tax portion of property tax bills.

New Jersey Constitution:

No tax shall be levied on personal incomes of individuals, estates and trusts of this State unless the entire net receipts there from shall be received into the treasury, placed in a perpetual fund and be annually appropriated, pursuant to formulas established from time to time by the Legislature, to the several counties, municipalities and school districts of this State exclusively for the purpose of reducing or offsetting property taxes.

To address the property tax crisis the state needs to distribute revenue from the Property Tax Relief Fund (state income taxes) more equitably and must curb escalating education costs in Abbott School Districts to ease the state’s budget crisis. You can compare property tax information and state property tax relief for your town against others here. It’s a real eye opener.

As Governor Corzine looks to add a surcharge to the income tax, what he really will be doing is taxing your income to provide more property tax relief to those already getting the lion’s share. Hard pressed property taxpayers don’t need rebates; they need an equitable distribution of funds from the state’s Property Tax Relief Fund.

Contact your state representatives and tell them you oppose an income tax surcharge or income tax rate increase. Tell them the state is not distributing property tax relief fairly and it’s time for this practice to stop. Find the names and contact information for your representatives in the state’s Assembly and Senate here.

We’ve written on this topic so many times, it’s nice to see others in the blogosphere bringing this travesty to the attention of a wider audience. Bulldog Pundit at ABP writes:

Budget advisors for new NJ Governor Jon Corzine (sworn in last week) have raised the possibility of taxing private 401(k) retirement accounts to help close a $6 billion budget gap.

Nearly 20% of that amount is needed simply to keep state pensions solvent. As many of you know I've harped on the destructive policies of state defined benefit pension plans, and now the chickens, as they say, are coming home to roost. I wonder how NJ residents will feel having their private retirement accounts reduced simply to help pay for those of public employees?

Alexander K. McClure at PoliPundit weighs in on the topic with - The Path to a Republican Governor in NJ in 2010.

Just a few of our previous posts on the subject:
The High Cost of Public Employees
Public Employees Lecture New Jersey Taxpayers
Rutgers Report: New Jersey's Economy Lags Nation
The More They Waste, The More They Make
Codey: State Pensions, Benefits "Strangling" New Jersey Taxpayers

New Jersey taxpayers should heed Jeff Faria’s words and take action now! November’s elections may be a done deal, but that does not mean the democratic process ends. Contact your representatives in the state’s Assembly and Senate and tell them you want meaningful spending cuts now, before it’s too late! Find your representatives' names and contact information here.

Corzine's win means that voters don't see the danger ahead, and we can't blame them for being in denial over our situation. But that also explains why no real change is forthcoming.

So until meaningful opposition presents itself, meaningful budget cuts will NOT happen, no matter how obviously bloated our government's payrolls are. Instead of cuts, business-destroying sales taxes are on the way. Our most mobile (often our best-off) citizens aren't going to sit and be fleeced, not with the option of New York or PA nearby and looking increasingly competitive.

Here comes a whole new level of pain, as the wealthy and mobile continue to bail and the tax burden gets driven down to lower economic stratas. You'll see gas taxes, clothing taxes, incomes taxes, and sales taxes hiked.

This cycle of government spending and empty 'reform' promises will continue until the system finally collapses.

Unfortunately, by then it's too late, and cuts won't end the death spiral.

Click the Graphic for More Information

SmadaNeK lets Garden State bloggers know where they stand as he hosts the Carnival of the New Jersey Bloggers #37.

Lot’s of blogging going on about John Kerry and Ted Kennedy posting on Kos. The Senators from Massachusetts are merely following a trend started by Barbara Boxer, followed by Russ Feingold and Jon Corzine. Kennedy’s first post was actually on June 7, 2005, so Kerry is really a Johnny-come-lately to the Democrat Senator Kos Club.

Bob the Corgi is back. Just thought you might like to know.

Before resigning as Governor of New Jersey in November 2004, Jim McGreevey acknowledged that he was "state official 1" referred to in an extortion, mail fraud and bribery indictment. The indictment was against Democrat fund-raiser David D'Amiano. The details of the indictment and the shakedown by officials can be read here.

The Halper family owned a farm that Piscataway (Middlesex County) was looking to take through eminent domain. The county offered Harper $3 million for the property, an amount the family believed to be far less than fair market value.

Then, David D'Amiano approached Halper and worked out a deal where the farmer would donate money to Democrats in return for assurances that elected officials would help get him a better price.

According to the indictment, D'Amiano arranged for government officials to mention the code word "Machiavelli" in their conversations with Halper to assure him that he was getting what he was promised. One state official and a county official spoke the code word to the farm owner in face-to-face meetings, according to the indictment. We now know the state official was then-Governor McGreevey.

Halper donated about $40,000 after a court ruled Middlesex County officials could seize his farm under eminent domain to prevent Halper from selling it to a developer. Once D'Amiano got involved and the donations were made, the government’s offer jumped to $7.4 million.

Harper said “it took a donation to the Democratic State Party and an FBI-supervised payoff to get officials to sit down and hammer out a reasonable offer."

Federal authorities played McGreevey tapes of his conversations with Halper and D'Amiano during an interview back in March 2004. At the time McGreevey said rumors that that he was "state official 1" mentioned in the indictment was essentially a smear campaign aimed at him by Republicans through U.S. Attorney Christopher Christie. We now know McGreevey was lying.

Yesterday, a Superior Court jury awarded the Halper’s nearly $18 million for the land, which was seized by the township of Piscataway in Middlesex County.

McGreevey was not charged in the indictment with D'Amiano, and still faces no charges in the continuing investigation. Why?

Ninety-two percent (92%) of New Jersey voters believe the state's budget problems are serious, and most would prefer that it be balanced by cutting services rather than raising taxes, according to a newly released Quinnipiac poll.

Voters say 57 - 28 percent that they would rather cut services than raise taxes to balance the state budget. Democrats split 44 - 44 percent on service cuts or tax hikes, while Republicans prefer service cuts 75 - 13 percent and independent voters prefer service cuts 55 - 26 percent.

Given nearly everyone in the state understands there is a serious budget problem facing the state and a clear majority would prefer spending cuts to tax increases; you have to scratch your head and wonder why Jon Corzine was elected Governor this past November. Corzine ran on his “affordability agenda”, chuck full of new state spending initiatives. What were voters thinking? Better still, what were the citizens who failed to vote thinking?

We are left to conclude tax receivers were highly motivated to vote in their self-interest and that many taxpayers stayed home because they didn’t believe Doug Forrester would govern with their interests in mind – it really didn’t matter who won the election – their interests would not be placed first in a Forrester administration.

This is a major failing of New Jersey’s Republican Party in our opinion. The Party tries to court both taxpayers and tax receivers, a strategy that fails time and again. Taxpayers hear a mixed message from state Republican candidates and therefore, stay away from the voting booth in droves.

Taxpayers need representation and they are not being well served by the New Jersey Republican Party’s weak advocacy and muddled message. There’s a majority of voters in New Jersey longing for candidates willing to stand up to the special interests and to fight for their families and economic future. What will it take for the state’s Republicans to become their standard barer? Wake up Republicans!

Aaron Brown, the former anchor of CNN's NewsNight said he is shocked "by how unkind our world has become." E-mail and talk radio appear to have given people the license to say anything, regardless of how cruel or false it may be, he said.

Now check out the two examples Brown provides, one from the left and one from the right.

He cited the example of an e-mail faulting what the sender considered to be NewsNight's inadequate coverage of an anti-war protest in Washington, D.C. The note ended with, "I hope the violence visited on the people of Iraq will someday be visited on your children."

Those on the opposite side of the political spectrum are no more tolerant, Brown said. "Any criticism of the administration is regarded as hatred of the president and hatred of the country itself," he said.

Brown provides a specific “say anything” example from the left and without a doubt the sender’s message was uncalled for, viciously personal and cruel. The example he provides from the right is not specific, and whether true or false, amounts to the opinion of some viewers. For all we know, Brown’s correspondents from the right may have been responding to the anchor’s willingness to “say anything” about President Bush and the country “regardless of how cruel or false it may be”

There’s a big difference between the examples, no?

The European Union expressed support for New Jersey's decision to suspend executions while a task force studies the fairness and financial costs. New Jersey has 10 prisoners on death row. If the state studies this matter long enough, there won’t be any.

Assemblyman Christopher Connors (R-Ocean), a member of the Assembly Judiciary Committee recently pointed out: "We haven't committed the death sentence for anyone for 43 years. Effectively we have a de facto moratorium in place."

Do you think the EU was aware New Jersey’s legislation was an empty gesture?

Senator John Kerry (D-MA), currently in Davos, Switzerland, has called for a filibuster of Judge Samuel Alito. Kerry announced his decision Wednesday to a group of Democratic senators, urging they join him. Kerry also has the support of his fellow Massachusetts senator, Democrat Edward Kennedy.

Never mind the majority of Americans favor Alito’s confirmation, the Senator’s from Massachusetts are ginning up campaign contributions and bowing to pressure from special interests groups. Kerry’s move is a purely political stunt and surely aimed to please his recent blogging host, Kos and like-minded left-wingers.

Everyone that has paid attention to the confirmation process knows Judge Alito is superbly qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. Rasmussen found in every state that the firm polled, a plurality or majority believes Alito should be confirmed. In New Jersey, 53% favor Alito’s confirmation, 28% oppose. Who’s out of the mainstream?

Meanwhile, New Jersey Senators Frank Lautenberg and Bob Menendez claim they have yet to decide how vote on Alito’s confirmation. Give them a call and help them decide to vote yes on confirmation.

Senator Frank Lautenberg - 202-224-3224
Senator Bob Menendez - 202-224-4744

Update: Kerry explains his rationale for an Altio filibuster on his blog host, Kos.
Update II- ABP- Just Politics? - A Look At The "Political Calculus" Of Kerry's Filibuster Call
and more at Betsy's Page

“The fiscal health of the state of New Jersey has plunged perilously close to ruin”, begins a “politically explosive” report from Corzine's “budget and re-engineering government” policy group. The Press of Atlantic City obtained a copy of the report Wednesday.

The report portrays a grim picture of state finances, estimating the accumulation of $30 billion in debt and another $30 billion in unfunded liabilities to retirement and health care programs. The group warns that without changes the problem will get worse as the state continues to spend more money than it takes in.“

[T]he state has gone from a financial powerhouse to a financial basket case,” the report states. “Make no mistake. Failure to implement fundamental change will have grave consequences, including a further downgrading of the state's debt rating and therefore higher borrowing costs, skyrocketing property taxes due to a reduction in state aid and rebates, and reduced state services in order to pay for mandatory debt service, pensions, health care costs and more.”

The “budget and re-engineering government” report includes these recommendations to Governor Corzine:

• An increase in the gas tax to help replenish a bankrupt state Transportation Trust Fund
  
  A “temporary tax-rate surcharge” to plug a $5 billion hole in the 2006-07 budget. (See Assemblyman Louis Manzo (D-Hudson) income tax surcharge plan here.)
  
  Add a sales tax on clothing
  
  Tax tanning and massage parlors, limousine services and cable television
  
  Reduce state operating costs by requiring all departments to cut current budgets through hiring freezes
  
  A mandated vacation week without pay for state workers
  
  A "symbolic “across-the-board symbolic salary cuts for employees not in a collective bargaining unit (The majority of state employees are represented by unions and covered by collective bargaining)
  
  Gradually eliminating the state's pension program by offering defined contribution plans, such as 401(k) accounts, for new hires
  
  Immediately move members of the legislative and executive branch not covered under collective bargaining to a defined contribution plan

The Corzine agenda was clear from the beginning of his campaign for governor – raise taxes. Corzine ran on an “affordability” platform which amounts to taking money from taxpayers to give to his tax receiving supporters.

New Jersey is a “financial basket case” because government has spent more than its citizens can afford. Look at those clamoring for taxes increases – politicians that have purchased votes with your hard earned money and those on the winning side of the tax and spend ledger.

“Symbolic” state spending cuts may fool some into believing Corzine’s budget plans call for a shared sacrifice, but these token cuts are all mere window dressing. Look no further than Corzine’s pledge to increase state spending by one-half billion dollars in just one of his steps along the path to “universal healthcare.”

The key to revitalizing New Jersey’s financial health is to:

• Roll back the McGreevey/Codey state spending increases
  
  Reduce benefits to all government workers in-line with private sector employees and not just new hires (New government hires should be few and only as replacements for essential positions)
  
  Revise the property tax relief funding formula to bring about greater parity in aid to municipalities and per student spending in the state’s public schools
  
  Place a moratorium on state funded school construction
  
  Cut taxes to stimulate the state’s economy and high-paying job creation.

It’s not possible to tax people or the state into prosperity. Many have tired, all have failed. And if you need an example, just remember New Jersey.

Update: A Blog For All - You Were Warned: “Indeed, throughout New Jersey, retail is doing quite well. But don't expect it to last if the taxes go up. That rosy retail picture can quickly change if the imposition of sales tax [on clothers]drives off consumers to other places.” “Make no doubt about it. No matter how much any of those taxes are increased, it will not solve the budget woes.”

Dynamobuzz - That Didn’t Take Long: “Jon Corzine inaugurated as New Jersey governor: January 17, 2006. Plans to increase taxes on the already over-taxed New Jersey residents: January 26, 2006. I think Jim Florio took at least a month of posturing before initiating his tax increases. Corzine has done the same in less than two weeks”

Judge Samuel Alito, a native of New Jersey, has the support of Pennsylvania’s two Senators, Rick Santorum (R) and Arlen Spector (R), as well as top Democrats in the Keystone State.

Pennsylvania Democrat, Robert Casey, running against Senator Rick Santorum for the U.S. Senate, announced yesterday that he supports confirming Judge Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Casey's announcement came hours after Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA), an abortion-rights supporter and former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said he thinks Alito ought to be confirmed. Rendell’s wife Midge serves with Alito on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals,

Now in Alito's home state of New Jersey it's a different story. Former Senator and now-Governor Corzine (D-NJ) skipped the traditional role of introducing a constituent to the Senate as a Supreme Court nominee.

Sen. Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ) remains undecided. "This is a man who is very capable. It's a question of how he uses those capabilities. That's the question for me. I want to wait until we uncover everything we can about his views," Lautenberg said.

Newly appointed Sen. Robert Menendez (D-NJ), who succeeded Gov. Corzine in the U.S. Senate, said he is still reviewing the notes of a 45-minute conversation he had with Alito last week and hopes to have a decision by the end of the week.

Menendez said he remained concerned about whether Alito would be independent of the president and the executive branch.

State Senator, Tom Kean (R-NJ) supports Judge Alito’s nomination and urged the members of the United States Senate to confirm the Judge. Kean is the presumptive Republican nominee in this year’s senate race against Menendez.

Update: Rasmussen Reports: Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans believe Samuel Alito is likely to be confirmed and serve on the U.S. Supreme Court. In every state that Rasmussen polled on this topic, a plurality or majority believe Alito should be confirmed. In New Jersey, 53% favor Alito’s confirmation, 28% oppose.

Drudge Report:

Most voters now say there's no way they'd vote for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton if she runs for president in 2008 - while just 16 percent are firmly in her camp, a stunning new poll shows.

CNNGALLUP found that 51 percent say they definitely won't vote for Clinton (D-N.Y.) in 2008, another 32 percent might consider it, and only 16 percent vow to back her. That means committed anti-Hillary voters outnumber pro-Hillary voters by 3-1. The poll suggests she can forget about crossover votes - 90 percent of Republicans and 75 percent of conservatives say there's no way they'd back her.

Meanwhile, 46% said they would oppose Secretary of State Rice if she ran for President - a step Rice has repeatedly said she won't take.

We’d like to see Condi Rice run for President, although she probably won’t. Still it’s good to see Secretary of State Rice is more popular than Senator Clinton.

Update - Riehl World View: Okay, now ask yourself, this is stunning and shocking as compared to what, exactly?

Was there another recent legitimate poll done showing her as a shoe in I missed? Has there been anything other than some MSM talking heads who perhaps love to coo over Hillary's political potential telling us anything contrary to this poll? If so, I'm unaware of it.

Michael Coviello attends Hasbrouck Heights High School in New Jersey.

Michael was sent from school for violating a school district policy.

Michael was “livid” and thought “his rights were being violated”.

Michael and his mother said they "forgot" about the school policy.

Michael’s antics at school the next two days were enough to earn him a seat in the principal's office "immediately"

"The entire protest was Michael's idea. My husband and I did not approve of this," Michael’s mother said. "We warned him that he would get into trouble.”

Laura Coviello, Michael’s mother said she spoke with schools Superintendent Joseph Luongo, who explained district policy.

Michael continued his “protest” and on the third day, Principal Peter O'Hare told Michael his behavior was disruptive.

Michael was given a note to bring home to his parents explaining that he was barred from continuing his “protest”.

That's when Laura Coviello contacted the ACLU.

"If Michael wants to protest, then he should have that right," Laura Coviello said.

After that, Michael continued his protest everyday.

Last week, the Coviellos, an ACLU representative and school administrators crafted a compromise

"This is the right outcome," ACLU attorney Jeanne LoCicero said in a written statement. Michael protested a "senseless, discriminatory school policy," she said.

What was Michael Coviello “protesting” and what “right” was the ACLU defending?

Fausta has the answer.

Did you ever wonder where reporters find "little guys" to quote in their articles? Take the New York Times article, After Subpoenas, Internet Searches Give Some Pause, as an example. How do reporters go about finding people frightened, changing their behavior, at the news the Justice Department has asked Google and others to turnover millions of internet search queries? Do they go through their rolodexes or do they just ask around?

Even though it has been widely reported that the search queries requested by the government cannot be traced to their source, and therefore no personal information about users would be given up, the Times managed to find these folks to quote:

Kathryn Hanson, 45, a former telecommunications engineer who lives in Oakland, Calif., immediately told her boyfriend she’d Googled 'rent boy,' just in case I got whisked off to some Navy prison in the dead of night," she said.

Jim Kowats, 34, a television producer who lives in Washington, has been growing increasingly concerned about the government's data collection efforts. "Where does it stop?" he said. "What about file sharing? Scalping tickets? Or traveling to Cuba? What if you look up abortion? Who says you can't look up those things? What are the limits? It's the little chipping away. It's a slippery slope."

Mike Winkleman, 27, a law student who lives in Miami said he would like to think that the erosion of his privacy was for "a good cause, like national security or preventing child porn," he said. "But I can't help but feel that for each inch I give, a mile will be taken."

Sheryl Decker, 47, an information technology manager in Seattle, said she was now thinking twice about what she said in her personal e-mail correspondence. "I have been known to send very unflattering things about our government and our president," Ms. Decker said. "I still do, but I am careful about using certain phrases that I once wouldn't have given a second thought."

Genny Ballard, 36, a professor of Spanish at Centre College in Danville, Ky., said she had grown more conscious about what she typed into the Google search box.

Ming-Wai Farrell, 25, who works for a legal industry trade association in Washington, said: “It’s scary to think that it may just be a matter of time before Googling will invite an F.B.I. agent to tap your phone or interrogate you.

Thankfully, the reporters were able to find two people with a logical reaction to the government’s request for the information as part of its effort to uphold an online pornography law.

Josh Cohen 34, a financial adviser in Chicago said he was willing to accept that tradeoff in the pursuit of national security. "In order for the government to catch people that prey on children, or fight the war on terror, they are going to need the help of the search engines."

Mr. Cohen said he doubted there would be much compromising of his individual privacy because the amount of data collected by the government was so voluminous. "My rationale tells me that with close to 300 million people in the U.S., and about 45 to 50 percent of households having Internet access, that I don't need to be too concerned with my search engine behavior," he said.

Susan P. Crawford, a professor at the Cardozo School of Law in New York, agreed that the sheer volume of information obtained by the government was likely to dilute privacy threats.

"More experienced Internet users would understand that in the mountain of search-related data available in response to a subpoena, it is very unlikely that anything referring to them personally would be revealed," Professor Crawford said.

And another question. Isn’t it a little strange that people so afraid of the government finding out about personal matters are willing to share these details, including their names for publication in the New York Times?

Drudge is sure pushing this story about an iris scanning program at an elementary school in the Freehold Borough School District.

Funding for the project, more than $369,000, was made possibly by a school safety grant through the National Institute of Justice, a research branch of the U.S. Department of Justice.

"The idea is to improve school safety for the children," said Phil Meara, superintendent, Freehold Borough School District, on Monday. "We had a swipe-card system that operated the doors, but the technology was obsolete."

Gosh, only $369,000 – every school in New Jersey will need to install the equipment.

As Mister Snitch points out Wampum, has come up with the Koufax Award for blogs most deserving of wider recognition. Of course this in recognition of “lefty” blogs, no doubt named after the great left-hand pitcher – Sandy Koufax.

There are many blogs deserving of wider recognition and they are not all “lefties” So to honor “rightie” blogs, we are taking nominations for the Walter Perry Johnson Award for blogs most deserving of wider recognition.

To nominate a blog, submit the blog’s name and URL in the comments section of this post by no later than February 28. Winners will be awarded the cyber plaque shown at the right.

Note: We would have used the name of the greatest right-hand pitcher of all time – Cy Young – but another prestigious award already uses the name. To learn more about Hall of Famer, Walter Perry Johnson, check out this biography here and his stats here.

Michelle Malkin has this quote from GOP Sen.Lindsay Graham at today’s Senate Judiciary Committee vote on Judge Samuel Alito:

Let me tell you another thing that's not good for the country. [Reading from a news article:] "With little chance of stopping Judge Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court, Senate Democratic leaders urged their members to vote against him in an effort to lay the groundwork for making a campaign issue of his decisions on the court."

I'll just tell you right now. We welcome that debate. We'll clean your clock.

I mean, Judge Alito is closer to the mainstream of America than Citizens (sic) for an American Way.

We'll win that debate, but the judiciary will lose if we continue to do this.

Graham’s statement reminds us of this quote in an article by Democrat operative, Dan Gerstein in Sunday’s Wall Street Journal:

We don't have any leader in power who will tell our base that we're not going to become a majority party again by telling the majority they're out of the mainstream.

Property taxes in New Jersey have increased 29% over the past four years according to a report in the Star-Ledger. So how do you solve the problem of ever increasing property taxes? The answer according to Hudson County Assemblyman Louis Manzo (D) is to raise the state’s income tax and eliminate the property tax rebate.

Based on a plan developed by the New Jersey Coalition for Property Tax Reform and refined by Manzo, the state would impose a 25 percent surtax on state income taxes and eliminate property tax rebates to generate a combined $3.3 billion. Manzo would use these funds to “to cut school property tax bills in half.”

Call us skeptical. Last year New Jersey’s municipalities collected $19.5 billion in property taxes and will certainly collect more in 2006. Property taxes pay 60% of the total coast of public school education in the state or about $12 billion. Obviously half of $12 billion is not $3.3 billion.

To mitigate the need for higher property taxes and to bring about parity in per student spending throughout the state, New Jersey introduced the income tax in 1975. New Jersey’s Constitution stipulates revenue from the income tax can only be used to reduce the public school portion of property tax bills.

This year New Jersey will collect a minimum of $9.5 billion in revenue from the state’s income tax and all of it will be distributed to municipalities for the sole purpose of reducing property tax bills. However, property tax relief is not allocated in a fair and equitable manner.

Homeowners living in New Jersey’s urban centers receive huge property tax reductions, while those living in rural and suburban towns receive little in the way of relief. Families with identical incomes and home values receive wildly different property tax relief from the state under the present system. This inequality has led to the current property tax crisis in New Jersey.

Parity in per student spending has long since been achieved and then exceeded in New Jersey’s “needy schools”. In every case an Abbott School spends far more per pupil than its non-Abbott School counterpart. For example, Haddonfield’s (Camden County) average cost per student is $10,658 while Camden (Camden County) spends an average of $15,091. That’s a 42% difference in spending per student. State property tax relief for a Camden homeowner is $10,654, a Haddonfield homeowner benefits from a $385 reduction.

This inequality is further exacerbated with the allocation of state school construction funding. Abbott School construction is paid 100% by the state, while rural and suburban towns receive little or no financial assistance. Is it any wonder a Star-Ledger analysis found school contraction costs were an average 45 percent higher for schools built with state funds versus those built with local funding?

Assemblyman Louis Manzo pays $5,887 in property taxes on his residence in Jersey City, $20 more than the average $5,867 property tax bill in the state. Manzo has his school tax bill reduced by $11,057 out of the state’s income tax fund – nearly twice the property tax bill he pays.

The average spending per student in Jersey City is $14,420. Compare this to per student spending in Millburn of $11,820 and state property tax relief of $472 per homeowner. No surprise a recent Millburn school bond referendum was soundly defeated by voters, Millburn’s property taxes are already among the highest in the state.

Manzo would like to increase the income tax to provide homeowners and renters with an average of $1,500 in school tax relief. We’ve seen how well the income tax has worked to reduce school taxes. It hasn’t. New Jersey has the highest property taxes in the nation. Now Manzo and his pals are working toward making the state’s income tax the highest in the country.

Manzo is offering more of the same - inequitable school spending, inequitable property tax relief and higher taxes. No thanks.

Do any of you remember Clutch Cargo and his pals, Spinner and Paddlefoot? It was a TV cartoon from the late 50's or early 60's that used this weird combination of live-action human lips with animated drawings. (Clutch Cargo would have never entered our minds in a million years without this post from our favorite teacher.)

Anyway, see what this long forgotten cartoon has to do with the Sunday morning talk shows and Mary Matalin over at Betsy’s Page. We’re still laughing over this one.

Click the Graphic for More Information

Sharon at the Center of New Jersey Life invites one and all to the Carnival of the New Jersey Bloggers #36.

We’ve written on this subject before, but the article in the New York Times - Deal for Stadium in New Jersey Gives Teams Reason to Cheer – reminds us why state run businesses are such a bad idea. And we mean any business – entertainment, real estate, stem cell research, manufacturing – you name it.

One reason – politicians make decisions based upon political considerations and not sound business or financial calculations. The state's deal on the sports stadium and property in the Meadowlands is just one sad example.

In his farewell address last week as governor of New Jersey, Dick Codey highlighted his deal to build a new stadium in the Meadowlands as an accomplishment.

"We watched a new day rise in the Meadowlands with the Giants and the Jets working together to build a new stadium at no cost to the taxpayers," said Mr. Codey, who has described the deal as a win-win for the football teams and for New Jersey residents.

But as any fan knows, some wins are more lopsided than others. The new, 80,000-seat stadium promises to be a gold mine for the teams, and something less than that for the taxpayers.

The Giants and the Jets will make a killing. Here’s what they get:

• $183.9 million a year from advertising and premium seats


• $100 million for each team in annual media revenues


• $55 million in ticket sales for each team


• $17.5 million a year for the stadium's naming rights


• $35 million a year from corporate sponsors and advertisers whose logos will adorn the stadium


• $30.8 million a year for club seats


• $102.8 million a year for luxury suites


• Ability to develop the property with 520,000 square feet of restaurants, ports stores, entertainment facilities, health and fitness centers and halls of fame and millions more in profit

New Jersey’s taxpayers on the other hand will take a beating. This is what we get:

• $100 - $124 million in debt on the old stadium


• $30 million bill for utilities, sewers and other infrastructure for the new stadium


• Loss of the revenue, about $19 million, the state currently gets from parking, luxury suites and advertising under the current lease


• New Jersey must acquire 20 acres in northern New Jersey for a Jets headquarters and training facility


• The Giants are getting the free use of 20 acres in the Meadowlands for training fields


• A total of $5 million a year in rent from the Jets and the Giants for the next 25 years


• In lieu of taxes the teams will pay a combined $1.3 million for the next 15 years


• Sales tax revenue from tickets, merchandise and concessions and income taxes from the players for the days they are in the state


• Two New York football teams - they won't even use New Jersey in their names

This is a business deal only a politician could love. The Giants and Jets had nowhere else to go and yet this is the best deal the state could make? The property in the Meadowlands, some of the most valuable in New Jersey, could have been leased or sold for far more than a paltry $6.3 million a year. Not only does the deal cost New Jersey’s taxpayers money, we have lost a valuable asset that could have generated big bucks for the state's treasury.

George Zoffinger, the chief executive of the sports authority, was a vociferous critic of what he described as the one-sided nature of the new deal. But he was overruled by Mr. Codey.

You have to ask yourself why Codey did.

Update: The Star-Ledger - Concerns about whether the state got a fair deal were raised after the teams floated a prospectus among investment bankers earlier this week in an effort to financing for stadium construction.

"It's 183 for the Giants and the Jets to five for the state of New Jersey," said George Zoffinger, executive director of the New Jersey Sports and Exposition Authority.

"Serious questions have to be raised about the financial adviser to the governor in negotiating this deal," Zoffinger said. "Codey would have been better off with Sponge Bob Squarepants as his adviser."

We have been witting for well over a year (see previous posts below) that the various stadium deals reported in the press were bad for New Jersey. Codey wanted a deal come hell or high-water and as we previously pointed out:

During the gubernatorial campaign last fall, Corzine would not say what he thought of the deal: "I have no idea. I haven't seen the numbers."

Now we learn:

Codey said Corzine never expressed concerns over finances when the two spoke during negotiations last fall. His singular worry, Codey said, was that the Jets and Giants were both part of the package, which they are.

The current stadium deal is not final and Governor Jon Corzine can order the Sports Authority and the football team owners back to the negotiating table. He should.

When Corzine was running for Governor he liked to bill himself as “among his party's chief economic and finance experts” and in the later months of the campaign promoted himself as “one of the nation’s foremost experts on the economy and financial markets”.

Let’s see if Corzine proves any better than Sponge Bob Squarepants.

Previous posts:
Kill The Deal With The New York Giants
The Opportunity Cost Of The Giant’s Stadium Deal
Giant Rip Off
We Want Our Bread, Not Circuses
The Fine Print Of The Giants Deal
Giants Stadium Was Always A Bad Deal For Taxpayers
Deal For New Giants Stadium Stalled
Democrat’s Priorities Inconsistent With Rhetoric.
NJ Taxpayers Still Owe $117 Million On Giants.Stadium
NJ Sweetens Stadium Offer To NY Giants
NY Jets - The Other NJ Football Team
Codey Eliminates “Pay To Play” For New York Giants.
NY Giants Seek New $700M Stadium In NJ

Corzine Looks To Add Half-Billion Dollars To New Jersey’s Budget Woes

In office less than three days and Jon Corzine is looking to add a half-billion dollars to the state’s budget, already inundated with a $6 billion deficit. The Governor wants taxpayers to provide medial insurance to an additional 259,000 children residing in New Jersey.

"One of the priorities that will actually get funded is that we get on that pathway to full insurance for all children," he said.

Corzine made the pledge as the Association for Children of New Jersey released Kids Count, its annual report on the welfare of the state's children.

Taxpayers currently pay more than $1 billion to insure 539,000 or 25 percent of New Jersey's children through Medicaid. Beyond Medicaid, more than 110,000 children are insured by taxpayers through KidsCare at a cost of more than $175 million. All New Jersey children with a family income up to $65,975, for a family of four, are eligible for coverage under the program. Income eligibility under KidsCare rises to $102,000 for larger families.

So who are these 259,000 children Gov.Corzine would like us to insure? According to Kids Count they are the children of immigrants. More precisely, illegal immigrants, as legal immigrants are already eligible for benefits under both Medicaid and KidsCare.

Why should the taxpayers of New Jersey pay for medical insurance for people with no right to be in New Jerse