Menendez Calls For Transit Security

At NJPolitics, Rep. Robert Menendez is quoted demanding more funds for urban transit security, an area in which many Democrats believe the Republican approved homeland security legislation of the past neglects.

Menendez went as far as to say that in response to the attacks in London and Madrid, "this Congress has hit snooze". Interestingly, despite Congress's nonchalance, the metro area has responded with significant security measures, with both New Jersey and New York City implementing random bag checks on the transit systems. For more, go to Glowie's Vista.

It is curious that the GOP leadership seems so uninterested with the idea of putting mass transit security ahead of their priorities, such as securing the Mexican border and doling out pork to heartland states that are under little risk of attack. In fact, the one attack that did occur in such a suprising location, the Oklahoma City bombing, exemplified the naive notions of many who believe that securing the U.S from Arabs is the most effective defense against terrorism. Timothy Mc Veigh was not Arab, in fact, he was an American citizen.

Nevertheless, what would increased transit security mean? Do random bag checks really protect people from suicide bombers? What do you think?

Many believe that Robert Menendez is an expert Pork dispenser, go to Tammany on the Hudson for more.

Ferrer's Flexibility With Social Issues

The title does not suggest that Fernando Ferrer is a waffler. However, as the leading Democrat in the New York mayoral race, he has curiously been the author of rather devisive quotes on the issue of abortion. Reports Exegenis: "I have problems with unlimited abortions. You know? Everytime a mother hiccups, it's not a reason to abort a child." Ferrer said this in 1996, when, according to Exegenis, he was running as the pro-life and pro-death penalty Democrat in New York.

This decade old statement has been subject to speculation in light of recent accusations against the mayor for his contributions to NARAL, the leading pro-abortion lobby, who announced their support for Bloomberg yesterday. Interestingly enough, Ferrer decided to use NARAL's endorsement of his opponent to his advantage,sending out lists of anti-abortion Republicans that Bloomberg had given campaign contributions to, such as Alabama senator Richard Shelby (formerly a Democrat), and Vito Fossella, the chairman of the mayor's re-election committee.

It's tough for Ferrer to come out looking good in this one. What he's doing isn't scandalous, it just happens to be transparent. It's hard to convince the voters of New York, who understand the radical significance of a NARAL endorsement, that the mayor isn't true to his pro-choice stance. It's also difficult to portray Bloomberg as a flip-flopper when he, unlike Ferrer, has never gone on the record as anything but staunchly pro-choice. In exchange for NARAL's support, Bloomberg, who has also given donations to President Bush, promised to only support the confirmation of John Roberts if the judge established himself in favor of Roe v Wade.

These candidates seem to be bogged down in allegiances. The question is, are they the right ones?

Dick Codey Takes On Outsourcing

Acting Governor Dick Codey recently signed an anti-outsourcing bill into law after it passed the legislature. Go here, to find the official press release that was given by the Governor's office.

It's suprising that Codey would take such a strong stance on trade, but it often seems that former local officials tend to be rather radical on labor-related issues. However, the language that was used to describe the bill was loaded with anti-immigration populism that hardly represents the opinions of most democrats in the state legislature.

While the bill obviously doesn't stop companies from outsourcing, it outlaws rewarding government contracts to companies that will be distributing the funds overseas, or will be employing non-Americans on the contract. Senator Shirley Turner (D-Mercer) announced that sending jobs overseas not only takes tax dollars away from New Jersey, but prevents tax revenue in the future.

This is simply not true. If a company can yield a larger profit by outsourcing a government contract, they will provide more tax revenue, not less. Although there is something dubious about spending New Jersey tax dollars on jobs done overseas, it's not different from using U.S taxes to give foreign aid, or more specifically, purchase foreign weapons.

Conservatives, liberals, what do you think about this bill?

Bush Administration Buys CAFTA

According to an article in Businessweek, the 54-45 vote in favor of CAFTA was pushed largely by grand promises of pork barrel projects in the states of "swing senators". The article opens by describing $2.5 billion worth of dams and locks a long the Mississippi River that bought the vote of Kit Bond, the senior Republican from Missouri. For more info, go to Media Mouse.

Interestingly, as the House vote comes up, many more representatives are voicing disapproval than expected. This shows that the word has gotten around Capitol Hill that the administration is willing to pay the price if you're having second thoughts about the free trade agreement. From a congressman's perspective, he shows some signs of skepticism, gets the administration to pay attention to his concerns, and receives millions--or billions of dollars worth of pork to tout come election time. CAFTA was thought to be a hopeless initiative, from the rhetoric of congress, it currently sounds even more hopeless, but with the promises coming from the Bush administration, will ultimately succeed.

This California resident expresses disgust with Diane Feinstein (D-CA) for voting Yea on CAFTA.

Apparently Richard Codey, the governor of the garden state, signs an "anti-outsourcing bill" into law. American Jobs Blog gives analysis and support.

New Jersey Dems Under Fire

The New Jersey Press, as well as the Jersey Blogosphere, has been critical of recent homeland security legislation that passed in the legislature. According to the Star Ledger, 93% of the anti-terroist funding in the bill went to Democratically controlled districts. The concerns are legitimate, and EnlightenNJ elaborates on the issue.

However, no objective observer can ignore the fact that Democratic districts are more populated and more vulnerable to terrorism. The worst part of the federal homeland security funding is that much of the pork is distributed to rural states with few risks. Although New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the nation, there are certainly rural areas that don't need the kind of funding that Camden, Newark, and Trenton do. Although it's unrealistic for us to pretend to know what percentage a particular district requires, the New Jersey Legislature has the right idea, compared to the federal one, which has, at times, shown proportionate support for Kansas as New York.

Go to NJConservative for a different perspective.

The Scent of Pork in Montclair

According to Baristanet, my hometown of Montclair New Jersey, has scheduled to build a new elementary school for an estimated $35 million. The school will hold less than 700 students and is also expected to champion new environmental innovations, such as solar panels, which will apparently be pricey to install, but will hopefully save money in the future.

However, Montclair residents, such as myself, are skeptical. Montclair leadership has a long history of pandering on the issue of wasteful spending for useless initiatives. Up until last year, the township spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay men to pick up empty garbage cans and place them back in the driveways of residents. The purpose behind this, according to former mayoral candidate Margaret Mukherjee, was to prevent "the atmosphere of abandonment" on streets where people weren't home to tend to their own garbage cans. Nevertheless, the same lower income families that that project was supposed to protect (poorer residents tend to be away from home more often and hence are not able to pick up the cans) are ultimately driven out of town because of the rising property taxes, which are exarcerbated by pork barrel projects such as useless garbage can pickups.

Go to NJConservative, for more insight on pork barrel spending on the state level.

At EnlightenNJ, the writer, in an article titled "Demonstrating the Reason for High Taxes", describes a high school that will cost $136 million in Union City.

Who Will The Opponents Be?

There is a lot of speculation about how the kind of support John Roberts will receive from the senate, come vote times, as well as the preceding debate on the confirmation. Nevertheless, any decent analyst should know that the Democrats will not be united in opposition to his confirmation, even if the majority decide to symbolically vote Nay.

First of all, Roberts has already been recognized as a "decent man" who is not a tool of political ideologues, unlike Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas, who have been widely classified as hacks. Secondly, many democrats, especially ones from swing states, have shown no desire to challenge the president on any previous judicial nominees, such as Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, probably the most conservative Democrat in the senate. Mark Pryor (D-AR), Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), and Mary Landrieu (D-LA), can be expected to vote with the GOP as well.

The mavericks, such as Joe Lieberman (D-CT), can be anticipated to vote in favor, especially someone like Lieberman, who, despite his relatively liberal voting record, has gained the reputation of being a centrist through conservative rhetoric and conservative stances on highly publicized votes. Bill Nelson of Florida will probably vote Yea as well as California moderate Diane Feinstein.

With those senators added to the 55 Republicans, and a few other suprise democrats, Roberts should get about 65-70 votes in favor of sending him to the court.

Idaho Greets Chairman Dean

According to Adam's Blog, a new conservative political outlet, Howard Dean toured several Western states and made some statements that have provided for interesting commentary from liberal and conservative bloggers alike.

The best quote was an earnest declaration from the Democratic chairman in Idaho, a state which favored Bush over Kerry by 38% : "People say, 'Why'd you come here? This is a Republican state,' but they're wrong." Maybe Mr. Dean should examine the 2004 elections in Idaho more closely, where not only Massachussets liberals lose handily, but so do conservative democrats. In the congressional races, Republican Representative Mike Smith must have felt like a chump when he won only 70% of the vote, compared to his fellow Republican Senator Michael Crapo, who won 99.2% of the electorate. The Democrat was a write-in candidate.

Those types of majorities are reminiscent of Sadam Hussein's "elections" in Iraq, where he won 100% of the vote. Idaho is similar to the former Iraq in that it is a one party system that can only be penetrated by a bloody war.

At Mydd, there is a list of comments made by Dean in different states, including Montana and Utah.

At MasteroftheComputer, there is an extremely insightful description of the Abortion issue that faces the Democratic Party in states such as the above.

New Jersey College GOP Leader Resigns

According to Sloppy Dawg, a New Jersey based blog, the head of the New Jersey College Republicans recently resigned, due to allegations that he attempted to extort the Forrester for Governor campaign out of $3000.

The actions taken by Damion are curious. Why would the head of a political organization, no matter how corrupt, try to take from the trough that will ultimately bring his friends to power and advance his cause? Is Damion simply a pramatist who believed that his chances of getting $3000 through a Forrester victory and a Forrester tax cut were smaller than his chance of getting a "pre-election rebate"?

Is this man really such a scumbag? Politics does, of course, stem from self interest. Constituents traditionally vote for the candidate that promises to represent their interests through tax cuts or entitlement programs. Even libertarians, who rail against pork barrel spending, don't mind seeing bacon distributed, as long as it's in their districts or in their pockets. Damion was trying to receive some party pork, with the losers being Republican contributors instead of the common American tax payer. Well...he probably would have benefitted from a few ethics courses in college.

Right Wing Rhetoric vs. Democratic Demogoguery

An interesting blog that anybody who is interested in old fashioned politics should check out is Modern America, an account of political events from the perspective of an individual from McDowell County, West Virginia. The man's name is Brandon Brewster. He's a good writer.

In one of his posts, Brewster rebukes a claim by Rush Limbaugh that Democrats "try to forget 9/11 and cut homeland security spending". His response is a typical one in politics : "WE SPEND MORE THAN YOU DO!." While this claim is true, and in the weeks after the London bombing the Democrats joined with moderate Republicans to pass homeland security funding that was largely opposed by the GOP, it illustrates the absurdity of campaign rhetoric. No constituent, and most members of congress, knows exactly how much money needs to be allocated for a specific program or security measure. They follow their party's advice and either announce that more funding is needed, or that their opponents are spending tax dollars on pork barrel projects.

However, often times, it's simply both sides taking credit for spending more money. John Kerry was pounded for voting against the $87 billion for Iraq military operations and likewise, Republicans have recently taken heat for voting against mass transit funding. Nevertheless, it's impossible for ordinary citizens to know how many billions are needed to protect New York subways. Although it's fair to make estimations and try to educate oneself, it's foolish to simply assume that one politician's claim about his opponent's cuts in funding hold water.