Enlighten-Politics

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Today's Blog Round Up

Sunday, October 23, 2005

Blog Round Up

Monday, October 17, 2005

The New York Times Endorsement

The Asbury Park Press warns New Jersey is not for middle class folks:

This middle-class squeeze has raised concerns among experts who warn that the state is heading toward a tipping point: Residents, stretched thin to live here, are putting their future financial health on the line. And wages aren't rising fast enough to help them get ahead.

Taken together, the high taxes, soaring home prices and comparatively stagnant wages paint a gloomy picture. College graduates might not make enough money to buy their first home in their home state. Residents who bought a home using unconventional financing could struggle to keep up with their mortgage payments five or 10 years from now. And baby boomers who want a smaller home that is easier to maintain might consider moving out of state - even if it means being farther away from their children and grandchildren.

These problems are caused by the high cost of government in New Jersey and yet The New York Times endorses Jon Corzine for Governor:

Given the mounting problems in New Jersey, one can only marvel that anyone of intelligence wants to be governor. Property taxes are among the highest in the country. The state budget faces huge deficits and growing pension woes. The school system is in perpetual trouble. And there is more political sludge and scandal than there are toxic sites.

The Times seems to understand the issues facing the state, but fails to mention it is the Democrats currently controlling the Governor's seat and both houses of New Jersey's legislature that have proven incapable of solving these problems and have made matters worse through their profligate spending. So why endorse Corzine:

In Washington, Mr. Corzine has shown the strength of his core progressive beliefs in the face of political challenge. Voters will demand the same courage at home. New Jersey deserves nothing less. We endorse Senator Corzine for governor.

It is those core "progressive" beliefs that have led to higher taxes and the squeezing of the middle class in New Jersey. So why does the Times endorse Corzine over Forrester:

Mr. Corzine has shown himself to be a force for America's better instincts in Washington over the last five years. He had the foresight to oppose the war in Iraq. He has worked to fend off Republican attacks on Social Security and voted against President Bush's reckless tax cuts.

The only point mentioned germane to the governing of New Jersey is Corzine's record on tax issues and as the Times reminds us, Corzine voted against tax cuts. The very tax cuts that have helped the state's taxpayers and have kept New Jersey's economy growing according to New Jersey's Council of Economic Advisors (appointed by the Governor, a Democrat.)

Why not Forrester according to the Times:

Mr. Forrester is a very successful businessman whose main company manages employee health benefit plans. He advertises himself as a moderate Republican in the manner of former Govs. Thomas Kean and Christie Whitman, but those credentials are thin on many telling issues. As one example, the cleanup of polluted sites could easily cost the polluter less and the taxpayer more under Mr. Forrester. And his reasons for opposing the state's embryonic stem cell research seem intentionally ambiguous. Mr. Forrester will only offer the argument that adult cells are more promising than embyronic cells.

How the Times arrives at the notion Forrester would stick taxpayers with the tab for cleaning up polluted sites is a mystery, they offer no examples. And because Forrester doesn’t believe New Jersey should spend taxpayer dollars on state owned businesses in stem cell research or other ventures, he’s a risk to taxpayers? Talk about "thin" reasons, for opposing a candidate.

As to the high property taxes, huge state budget deficits, growing pension woes, school spending out of control and political scandals, well the Times doesn’t explain why Corzine would be best in dealing with these issues. They don’t because they can’t. Jon Corzine has offered a $68 increase in property tax rebates for the average family and has a laundry list of new spending programs including a $5 billion tab for adding 750,000 people to the state’s healthcare rolls.

In terms of bucking the special interests that will be essential in getting the state's finances under control, well, even the Times recognizes Corzine is not the man for that:

Mr. Corzine, who has outspent his opponent to date, has insisted that his riches offer independence from special interests. So far, the money seems to have been more useful in buying the support of local power brokers than in empowering him to stand up to them.

So if you're looking for higher taxes and a Governor beholden to the special interests, the Times assures you that Corzine's your man. If you are looking for a Governor who is not beholden to special interests and has plans to cut state spending and meaningful property tax reductions, then the obvious choice to Doug Forrester.

Curiously, the New York Times did not endorse Corzine for the Senate in 2000. They were right the first time.

Friday, October 14, 2005

New Jersey's Governor's Race

Michael Barone’s take on the New Jersey Governor’s race:

This one is getting closer. Jon Corzine spent $65 million getting elected to the Senate in 2000 and seems to be spending similar magnitudes now. In between, Corzine has contributed millions to New Jersey's county Democratic machines and has gotten in return support from the crucial party bosses (George Norcross in Camden County and John Lynch in Middlesex County). These were the men who helped to engineer the withdrawal of Robert Torricelli from the 2002 Senate race and the substitution of former and future Sen. Frank Lautenberg and the resignation of Gov. Jim McGreevey. They also helped to sweep aside Acting Gov. Richard Codey in favor of Corzine. New Jersey Democratic politics is not gentle.

Republican nominee Doug Forrester, who lost to Lautenberg in 2002, seems to be an unimpressive candidate. Corzine led him by wide margins in polls from the June primary until mid-September. In the four most recent polls, Corzine's lead has been between 4 percent and 7 percent, and he has run below 50 percent in all of them. New Jersey is a low-information state, so running below 50 percent is not necessarily a danger sign, and Corzine's money will be employed to produce turnout in the state's heavily Democratic central cities. But sometimes you can have too much money. In 2000, Corzine got bad publicity when his campaign bused in residents of Philadelphia homeless shelters and halfway houses to work on turnout efforts. He won, but by only 50 percent to 47 percent. And New Jersey is not quite as Democratic as it was then: George W. Bush was beaten 56 percent to 40 percent in 2000 but only 53 percent to 46 percent in 2004. Corzine surely remains the favorite. But an upset looks possible.

Update: From the Cook Political Report

"NJ Governor’s Race Becomes a Toss Up: There has been no shortage of polling in the New Jersey gubernatorial contest between Democratic Sen. Jon Corzine and Republican businessman Doug Forrester. Throughout the summer, Corzine enjoyed a lead of between 10 and 18 points, depending on the poll. But, as voters have become more engaged in the race, Corzine’s lead has narrowed.

Zogby: NJ Gov Race Political Shocker Of The Year

Zogby weighs in on New Jersey's governor race:

Republican business executive Doug Forrester has gained significant ground on Democratic Sen. Jon Corzine, whose once double-digit lead has dwindled to a 44 percent to 43 percent statistical dead heat, according to a WNBC/Marist poll of 600 registered voters.

"What was supposed to be a coronation is actually turning into a bloody duel. Two weeks ago, I had Corzine ahead of Forrester by seven or eight points, so there isn't a doubt in my mind that this latest poll is accurate," said independent pollster John Zogby.

The Forrester campaign yesterday said the poll shows that Democratic corruption and scandal was a major factor in the race, as well as property taxes, issues that Mr. Forrester has been hitting hard in his campaign ads.

"These polls are tracking our internal polls. It's corruption, it's property taxes, it's Jon Corzine's connection to our former disgraced Governor Jim McGreevey and former disgraced Senator Bob Torricelli," said Sherry Sylvester, the Forrester campaign's communications director.

This is not good news for the Democrats that voters don't trust them as much. This could be the political shocker of the year," Mr. Zogby said.

You have to get a kick out of the Corzine campaign spin on the candidate’s freefall in the polls:

There's strong evidence that Jon Corzine's popularity is improving as the campaign continues." The campaign attacked Mr. Forrester for displaying a "negative and pessimistic attitude" about New Jersey.

The latest evidence that the race was dead even followed a recent Quinnipiac poll showing Mr. Corzine's once seemingly insurmountable lead had evaporated, putting him just four points ahead of his Republican rival.

Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Forrester - Corzine Debate # 2

Roberto at DynamoBuzz has a good synopsis of last night’s debate between Doug Forrester and Jon Corzine. After the debate on 101.5 FM callers were asked if anyone had decided who to vote for based upon what the candidates said during the debate. One caller, identifying himself as a Democrat, said he had decided to vote for Forrester because Corzine admitted he lies. He referred to Corzine admitting during the debate that he didn’t really think Jim McGreevey was a good Governor, but said he thought he had to lie because he was at a political event.

Friday, September 23, 2005

Consensus - Forrester Defeats Corzine in Debate # 1

A Philadelphia Inquirer editorial on Tuesday’s gubernatorial debate between Jon Corzine and Doug Forrester notes “Corzine looked and sounded like a candidate who is taking the voters for granted”.

Corzine chose to react defensively to the first question of the debate, about a gift $470,000 loan to former girlfriend (and union president) Carla Katz. His performance was mostly downhill from there, with an inarticulate and disengaged presentation of his proposed policies. At one point, Corzine dismissively referred to Forrester as the "opposition candidate," as if his own coronation awaits and a debate is a trifling inconvenience. Forrester, in contrast, came across as aggressive, focused and - gasp - prepared.

That is in sharp contrast to the Star-Ledger’s opinion that Corzine started out tenuously, seemed a bit nervous, but quickly gained his footing. We apparently were watching the same debate as the Inquirer as we wrote: Forrester was in command, well prepared and clearly articulated his positions, while Corzine appeared shaky, nervous and confused. It was our opinion Doug Forrester won the debate and the Inquirer agrees.

But why rely on someone else’s opinion. If you didn’t have a chance to see the debate you still can when NJN rebroadcasts the hour-long program this Sunday at noon or you can view the video online here.

For more commentary on debate #1 check out Roberto’s series of posts: Corzine vs. Forrester Debate, Round One; More Debate Follow-Up; More Debate Follow-Up, Part II; More Debate Follow-Up, Part III

Friday, September 16, 2005

Transcripts: The Roberts Confirmation Hearings