How to End Political Corruption Once-and-for All

Murray Sabrin

Allegations, investigations, indictments, convictions. New Jersey politics has become all too familiar. Of course, not all state legislators or local officials are ethically challenged. However, the indictment of the once powerful state senator Wayne Bryant who is alleged to have had a no show job at UMDNJ while he was head of the appropriations committee where he was able to steer taxpayers’ money to the university highlights what is wrong with government—all government.

Here in Bergen County Senator Joseph Conigilio, a retired plumber, had a $5,000 month consulting gig with Hackensack University Medical Center and was able to obtain substantial grants for HUMC. Any coincidence? The investigators are on the case.

As long as the State of New Jersey spends tens of billions per year ($33 billion is next year’s projected budget), untold nonprofit organizations and institutions, local governments and other interests will line up at the Trenton trough to obtain some of the spoils of the government’s plunder. The plunder of the public will continue because enough people have accepted the principle that government exists to provide them with economic security, health care, education and other benefits. In short, the welfare state is embraced by a majority of voters across the political spectrum, and, of course, most of the New Jersey’s editorial writers and commentators.

And when the system produces a Wayne Bryant and other alleged and convicted corrupt individuals, they are just shocked, shocked that the high and mighty are ripping off the public.

In the 2005 gubernatorial campaign Jon Corzine downplayed his welfare statism and positioned himself as a financial savvy, anti-establishment, fiscally responsibly, business-friendly candidate. And he won easily. As Corzine stated in his budget address he wants to spend more money, but the State of New Jersey is bankrupt. Not legally, but New Jersey is a financial basket case, and it will get worse before it gets better. More about the state’s economy is future columns.

In the meantime, to end political corruption in New Jersey, we do not need more commissions, ethics panels, breast beating, and other ineffective measures. We need to downsize state, county and local governments. We need to have less of the public’s money in government and more money controlled by the people who earn the money in the first place. In short, we need more liberty.

Every activity, program, and initiative of government should be provided by individuals, families, local, regional or national nonprofit organizations. For example, the greatest expense of state government is the nearly $11 billion that is distributed to local school districts. There is absolutely no reason state government should be funding education, including higher education. All services, including healthcare, must be devolved from the state to nonprofit institutions. That does not mean that taxpayers will be forced to pay for any of these institutions.

In polls, the public claims that it supports funding for Abbott school districts; the public claims that it supports healthcare subsidies for low-income seniors; the public claims it supports higher education subsidies; the public claims it supports social services for disadvantaged youths and the disabled.

If the public say they support helping the less fortunate in the Garden State, the most effective way to do so is to contribute to the best nonprofit institutions in their communities. A restructuring of New Jersey’s state government would abolish both the state income and corporate income taxes, reduce the sales tax and reduce, if not eliminate, most other state taxes.

With the creation of a limited government regime in Trenton, legislators would need to meet only a couple days a week, preferably on the weekend. We would finally create a citizen legislature. Legislators would have to make a living like the rest of us, providing a valuable service to the public.

With limited government in Trenton, political corruption as we know it would end. There would be no taxpayers’ money to distribute, that is, redistribute from earners to others. In short, there would be nothing to “corrupt.” State government would be confined to a few activities--state police, road maintenance, etc. Simple things. Once government ventures into activities like education, healthcare, and social services, costs go though the roof and corruption explodes. That’s the irrefutable fact of life. Government spending increases costs, plunders taxpayers and creates corruption.

The evidence is all around us. Big government is corrupting.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy.

The Democratic Party and Women in Politics

Fifty years ago, women would typically vote for the candidates their husbands voted for or would not vote at all. Times have thankfully changed and women now have a significant role in campaigns and elections. Whether it be the soccer moms of the 1990's or the security moms post-9/11, the role of women in politics has taken on greater importance, especially in the last decade. As a significant voting block, women have become critical to the election hopes of any politician. However, the number of women serving in elected office continues to be dwarfed by the number of men who serve. In New Jersey, on the Republican side of the aisle, something is being done to address this problem: the Christine Todd Whitman Excellence in Public Service Series. Unfortunately, the Democratic Party currently has no comparable program.

Founded in 1998, the Christine Todd Whitman Excellence in Public Service Series, a non-profit corporation, aims to increase the number of women serving at all levels of government: local, county, state and federal. Sixteen women are selected each year to participate and any Republican women can apply. Once selected, the women are provided in-depth leadership training in both governing and campaigning through a nine-month educational experience that includes readings, panel presentations, workshops, and homework assignments. They are also mentored by current women serving in public office. The program includes meeting with Republican elected officials in New Jersey, as well as a trip to Washington, D.C. to meet with federal officials.

While Republicans in New Jersey have created this important and positive training program for Republican women, there is no such program on the Democratic side of the aisle. As a result, there is a paucity of Democratic women who are adequately prepared to campaign and govern. Given that New Jersey is a Democratic state, it leaves one to wonder why there are so few Democratic women serving in elected office. The answer may lie in the lack of a program to encourage them to seek public office and to train them to run and serve.

Since its founding in 1998, over one hundred women located in every County in New Jersey have been trained through the Series. Many of these women have gone on to hold elected or appointed positions in local, county, state and federal government. The Republican leadership in New Jersey deserves commendation for instituting the Whitman Series. The Democratic leadership would be wise to create a comparable program so that Democratic women throughout the State have the same opportunities to learn about government and campaigns and be trained to serve in elected office as their Republican counterparts. It would be in the best interest of New Jersey to have women in both political parties trained in leadership in government.

Michael M. Shapiro, founder of ShapTalk.com, is an attorney who resides in New Providence, New Jersey. He currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and as Editor of The Alternative Press Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Domestic Terrorism

Murray Sabrin

This is the first essay I have ever written about a personal matter. I am angry, and you should be, too, because you could be next victim. I—or more exactly, my wife—was recently a victim of a crime, identity theft, a crime that should never occur in America. In fact, the primary reason identity theft occurs is because we have a Social Security number that has become a domestic personal identifying number, when it was never intended to be one. HA. The first rule of society is that everything government officials say is untrue unless proven true. Cynical? You bet. The evidence is on the cynics’ side.

When I returned from spring break I went through the mail and noticed a bill for a cell phone company we do not use. I called my wife in Florida who promptly called the phone company customer service center. The rep told her the last digits of the SS# on the account, and my wife confirmed that it was her number. The cell phone account was opened up in Brooklyn about two weeks ago. My wife called the number, a gutsy thing to do but she was pissed off (sorry for the academic jargon) and a male youngster answered the phone.

The cell phone company closed the account, and Florence is not liable for the charges. She notified one of the credit bureaus who sent her a form to fill out establishing her identity, and a hold was placed on her credit. This means she would have to be contacted if anyone wants to open a new account. So far, so good.

Last Tuesday I informed the business school secretaries of our recent ordeal. One of the secretaries had her credit card number stolen twice in one year. Thousand of dollars of merchandise was charged. She then told me one of her nephews is a Secret Service agent who is assigned to tracking down identity theft perpetrators. Last Tuesday I filed an identity theft report with the local police. The sergeant and I had a discussion of the jurisdictional problems facing identity theft victims, which brings up another major issue, namely, the lack of coordination among police forces to stamp out this form of domestic terrorism. The sergeant told me of a case of a local resident who spent two years trying to regain his identity. Two years!!!!!! He said the man was in tears because of his ordeal.

Why is identity theft so rampant? Thank the federal government for giving us a Social Security number that has morphed into a thief’s delight. Apparently, if someone has your SS#, he or she can create accounts, like a cell phone, in your name or obtain credit cards in your name. How this is possible given the checks and balances that could or should be in place is beyond me? Clearly, there should be more verification by credit card companies, banks, department stores, Internet based firms, etc., to verify who you are. It is sad that the bad guys have make life miserable for the rest of us. But one strain of human nature is to rip us off. For that kind of behavior people have to be punished-- swiftly and hard.

I do not know what the penalties are for identify theft. But they should be restitution to the credit card company, a similar payment to the victim, and a similar payment to the police. In other words, the supplier should be made “whole.” The victim should be compensated for the time and effort used to report the crime and emotional trauma, and the thief should reimburse the police for their efforts. Criminals should pay dearly for their crimes. Repeat offenders--are you ready for the draconian measure?--should be deported. Where? Who cares? As far away from a computer, cell phone, telephone, mailbox, etc. America has too many thieves. Let’s reduce the number of domestic terrorists once-and-for-all.

Also, we should no longer have to use SS# for banks, credit card companies, etc. Let’s ban the use of the SS# as a personal identity number. Identify theft goes hand in hand with big government. And the SS# is big government’s primary tool to keep track of us, while providing thieves with a means to rip all of us off.

In the meantime, you can protect yourself from identity theft by learning more about it at www.consumer.gov/idtheft. You should also obtain your credit report from one or all of the three credit bureaus, http://www.equifax.com/, http://www.experian.com/, and http://www.tuc.com/. In New Jersey you can get one from each company for free once a year. You can stop pre-approved credit offers by calling the credit reporting industry at 1-888-567-8688. Your local police station should have an Identity Theft Reference Guide. Get one now and tell all your friends, relatives and colleagues about it.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy (www.ramapo.edu/cbpp.)

A New Day for New Jersey Politics?

The New Jersey State Senate is composed of forty individuals who serve part-time. The Senate currently houses twenty-two Democrats and eighteen Republicans. In the past few weeks, eleven Senators have announced that they will not seek re-election; others may soon follow. Interestingly, eight of the ten Senators who are not seeking re-election are Republicans: Martha Bark, Leonard Connors, Bill Gormley, Walter Kavanaugh, Robert Littell, Robert Martin, Henry McNamara, and Joseph Palaia. The three Democrats are: Wayne Bryant, Joseph Doria and Bernard Kenny.

On the Democratic side, State Senator Wayne Bryant has publicly announced he is not seeking re-election. That is probably a wise decision given the fact that he is currently under criminal investigation and an independent monitor found that Mr. Bryant abused the public trust and fed deeply at the public trough for many years. Senators Joe Doria and Bernard Kenny have also declared their retirements from the State Senate. Both were facing the possibility of viscerally competitive primaries that had the potential of toppling either or both of them. By leaving the Senate, they can do so on their own terms or at the very least, not leave as a losing incumbent.

Of the eight Republican Senator who are not seeking re-election, Senators Robert Littell, Robert Martin, and Walter Kavanaugh were potentially facing strong primary challenges that they might not have been able to overcome. Senator Gormley, a frequent supporter of Democratic initiatives, left the Senate about a month ago; his retirement opens up the possibility for a Democratic takeover of his Senate seat. Senator Martha Bark had been under an ethical cloud but was recently cleared of wrongdoing. However, the charges levied against her may have caused her to rethink a bid for re-election. Meanwhile, the retirements of Leonard Connors, Joseph Palaia and Henry McNamara appear to be due to advancing age and long Senate careers (Connors became a Senator in 1981, Palaia in 1989 and McNamara in 1985, each having served well over 20 years in Trenton).

In the weeks ahead, other State Senators may also retire, including State Senator and former Newark Mayor Sharpe James who is facing a very strong primary challenge from Teresa Ruiz, backed by Mayor Cory Booker and much of the Essex County delegation. There are also several Senators in jeopardy of losing the upcoming Primary Election in June.

It remains to be seen whether the many new faces in the State Senate will result in palpable change in New Jersey politics. We do know that these retirements will result in the loss of a great deal of experience and knowledge about New Jersey politics and government. Given the state of politics in New Jersey, where the Legislature is suffering from dismal approval ratings and the public has lost trust in our elected officials, perhaps new blood that is not encumbered by the weight of experience and past history will be able to restore the public’s trust and the reputation of the State House.

Michael M. Shapiro, Publisher and Managing Editor of ShapTalk.com, graduated from Rutgers College and Stanford Law School. Mike currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and Editor of The Alternative Press. Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

The Ron Paul for President Phenomenon

Murray Sabrin

Last Wednesday, my article about Rep. Ron Paul’s chances to win the GOP presidential nomination was posted on www.lewrockwell.com. The responses from readers across the country kept me busy for two days responding to their emails. The emails to my analysis of Ron Paul’s announcement last Monday on C-SPAN that he is a candidate for the GOP presidential nomination ranged from wildly enthusiastic to outright cynicism.

A sampling of the comments below reveals that the Internet (and other spontaneous individual efforts) will play a major role in Ron Paul’s campaign during the next 9-12 months. The nominees of each party will probably be chosen by early February next year, because so many states, including New Jersey, have moved their presidential primaries up to February 5th. Thus, 2007 is looming more important than ever for all the candidates to capture the imagination of voters, as the primaries are “front loaded” in 2008. If this small sampling of responses to my article is any indication of Ron Paul’s support in America, he will be a competitive candidate, despite the current polls.

From Darel:
I'm very excited about Dr. Paul. I have never placed a bumper sticker on my Saab but for the first time I have one for Dr. Paul. To add I have an option for Billboards in the first few states and working on a great ad for Dr. Paul to help him win his nomination. Of course I'm doing all of this on my own since I have maxed out my personal contribution. Also, I own just under 100 Internet directories and in the process of adding a link to each site which deals with various topics after completed it should send over 70,000 hits a month to his site…

From Brian:
I agree with your analysis. I'm glad to learn that Dr. Paul himself was surprised at what he could raise online so quickly. The dollars needed are enormous, especially with a shortened primary season. Fortunately, we each have a fire in our belly and the truth. (Plus a sincere and articulate candidate.) I believe that some folks who’d given up on politics will 'come out of the woodwork' to rejoin the process once they hear more about him.

From Scott:
A president Ron Paul would shake Washington D.C. to its knees. Frankly, I'd be very concerned for his safety. Dr. Paul is a true champion of liberty and his election would be wonderful for this country.

From Yves:
Your article in LewRockwell.com entitled "Can Ron Paul Win?" is dead on! I've followed Ron Paul's work for quite a while now. I saw him the other night on CSPAN 2. There is no way the controlling establishment will want a Ron Paul.

From Ed:
Lord let’s do everything we can to help him...it would be a breath of fresh air.

From Granny Warriors (http://www.grannywarriors.com/):
We are also working for Paul's election. Any help you can give us will be appreciated. Please visit our website and you can see how we are working. The RV is now in the shop being repainted professionally so we can reflect Dr. Paul's campaign in a more dignified manner. It should be ready by next week and we hope to hit the road by then. We need help to pay for the fuel alone. Nothing more. We support ourselves as we are all retired but on very small fixed incomes and just cannot afford to do this ourselves any longer. Any help you can offer will be greatly appreciated.

From M.R.:
I appreciated your article very much and I do believe Congressman Paul can win. Even more important, I believe it is essential for the sake of our Republic, that he must win. My husband and I have been Ron's campaign managers for our county since 1998 when he returned to Congress the second time, until last year when he was redistricted out of our county. I have seen him win, when Democrats targeted his race to defeat him and I have seen him win when Republicans have targeted his race to defeat him. He wins when he is able to share with the voters the principles in which he believes and the passion he has for those beliefs.

From Rev. Fr. V.C.:
Thank you Dr. Sabrin for your insightful commentary on the candidacy of Dr. Paul. What was hardly conceivable three (3) years ago, can finally be fully realized with the primaries that will be held shortly. We are, of course, referring to the "blogosphere" which has erupted on the scene… A presidential run for Dr. Paul? Why call it "probable" when, with the coming of blogging, we can call it "very plausible indeed".

The naysayers who responded don’t think that a man of integrity and courage like Ron Paul would be allowed to win the GOP nomination, let alone the presidency. They, like Scott, are concerned for his safety, and what the establishment would do to him should it look like he would win the nomination. In other words, all the special interests would be lined up against him to bring him down at the end of the primary season. And if Rep. Paul should win the nomination, they would gang up to “destroy” him in the general election like the D.C. politicians tried to do to Senator Jefferson Smith in Frank Capra’s movie Mr. Smith Goes to Washington starring Jimmy Stewart. If passion and integrity were the deciding factors as to who would be the GOP presidential nomination, Ron Paul would win in a landslide.

The 2008 presidential campaign will be one of the most exciting in memory. There is no incumbent or vice president running; therefore, it will be a wide open race in each party’s primary. That means, anything is possible, including long shots winning the nominations. If I were a betting man, I would bet that today’s front runners, Hillary and Obama, and Rudy and McCain, will not be the presidential nominees. But then again, I thought Howard Dean would win the Democrat party presidential nomination in 2004.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Pubic Policy.

To Lease or Sell Key State Assets Requires Thorough Investigation

Recently, Governor Jon Corzine proposed selling or leasing key assets of the State including the New Jersey Turnpike. The Governor believes the sale or lease of such assets will provide billions in revenue that can be used for a variety of fiscally responsible measures including paying down the State’s debt. However, given the proclivity of politicians in New Jersey to spend every penny they can, it is doubtful that the Governor’s plans for the money would be championed by members of the State Legislature. In addition, the sale or lease of State assets may have negative consequences for New Jersey residents, including but not limited to, higher fees for use of those assets, improper maintenance and delayed repairs to maximize profits, and inappropriate or incompetent management of those assets.

In Indiana and Illinois, tolls have skyrocketed and roads have fallen into disrepair since being acquired by private investors. While the government’s ownership of these assets can have similar negative consequences, residents have numerous vehicles to address their concerns. When a company owns the assets, there is little that residents can do to combat higher fees and improper management.

The one-time injection of cash from such a sale or lease may be offset by long-term disadvantages. Such a sale or lease will forfeit annual revenues for many years for the State, leaving it in perilous shape should future needs arise that require additional government spending. For example, a 9-11-type attack in New Jersey in the future could financially cripple the State, especially if the revenue earned by the State from the sale or lease of State assets has already been spent.

Other options are available and should also be considered. For example, securitizing toll revenue would create additional income without handing control of State assets over to private interests. Securitization enables the government to receive a large influx of money up front. In exchange, for a period of time, investors receive revenue from the entity that controls the State asset. Under this scenario, investors could pay the State of New Jersey money up front and then receive revenue from the Turnpike Authority for a period of five or ten years. Still other options include a comprehensive State audit to uncover waste, fraud and abuse or revamping New Jersey’s healthcare and/or pension system.

Before anyone considers the sale or lease of our State’s most precious assets there needs to be a thorough investigation, weighing all advantages, disadvantages, and costs of doing so. The results of the investigation must also be made available to the public so all of our State’s residents who would be affected by the lease or sale can read for themselves the pros and cons of such a possibility and comment accordingly. In addition, should a sale or lease of State assets be undertaken, our elected officials should put protections in place to ensure that our residents do not suffer the negative consequences that have resulted in Indiana and Illinois.

Michael M. Shapiro, Publisher and Managing Editor of ShapTalk.com, graduated from Rutgers College and Stanford Law School. Mike currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and Editor of The Alternative Press. Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

Why Ideology Matters

Murray Sabrin

If you think the 2008 presidential campaign is an unending political marathon, get ready for the 2009 New Jersey gubernatorial campaign. It has arrived. Last week, Governor Corzine sent an email to his supporters reiterating many of the points he made in last month’s budget address.

I didn't run for office to be a number cruncher, or to play Scrooge - and the past year has been a difficult one of tough choices and bitter medicine. But our discipline and hard work are beginning to pay off. Certainly not enough to take a victory lap, yet. But we've had some important wins in our effort to put spending controls in place - and put New Jersey on an entirely new course of investment, growth and prosperity.

Corzine is positioning himself--again--as the no nonsense, compassionate Wall Street CEO who is taking on the Trenton political establishment in order to “invest” wisely on behalf of the people of New Jersey. The governor asserts he will also root out waste, fraud and corruption that are hampering the state’s economy from reaching its full potential, and hamstringing state government from using taxpayers’ money efficiently for worthwhile social purposes.

In addition, the governor wants to expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is essentially a tax refund for low income workers and a welfare payment disguised as a “hand up” to the working poor. In keeping with his ideological perspective, Corzine calls the EITC “a progressive tax cut for nearly 300,000 low and middle income working families.” In Corzine’s worldview, any government program or expenditure for poor, low-income, and middle income families or senior citizens is “progressive.” In other word, the means—redistribution of income by the state-- is noble and virtuous, because people have needs that the state is obligated to address.

Corzine obviously has a soft spot in his heart for families that are in the lower income brackets. The solution to poverty is relatively simple. Couples should not have children if they do not have the means to provide for them, and having children out-of wedlock is one of the most irresponsible acts anyone can commit. But taxpayers are supposed to be nonjudgmental and uncomplaining, and just pay their taxes so people can continue to engage in irresponsible behavior that has enormous negative social consequences.

Deferring child rearing and being an educated is the best anti-poverty program there is. That formula has been known for decades. But in our collectivist ideological world, it’s all about state control, state power, and state benefits. Individualism, family and community have been replaced with statism. Fortunately, the transformation to a total statist America is far from complete. However, the collectivist ideological triumphs have been stunning.

Two of the most important sectors of the economy are dominated by all levels of government: education and health care. That’s why Corzine, Hillary and other collectivists—both Democrats and Republicans--want more government involvement in these key areas. If universal health care comes to America—and it is coming faster than most people think—then the statists in both parties will have their greatest victory, the ability to determine who lives and dies in America. All in the name of security.

Because the welfare state is running out of money in New Jersey, Governor Corzine wrote to his supporters the following:
On the heels of our recent progress, I will continue to work to permanently restructure the state's finances. No idea advanced in good faith is off the table. And, yes, that means we ought to look carefully at something called asset monetization, which is a fancy bankers' term for leveraging state assets through leases or sales, assets such as the turnpike, the lottery, naming rights, and what have you. This approach has enormous potential to greatly reduce our crushing debt burden and free up billions of dollars that we are now paying to service that debt, our "charge card" payments. As long as we can ensure that public safety and the public interest are protected, we ought to move forward.

The governor admits that the state is broke, because his predecessors’ profligate spending. Nevertheless, Corzine will not be deterred from throwing a “Hail Mary” pass to refinance the welfare state in the Garden State. Both the short and long term solutions to New Jersey’s fiscal woes are a restructuring of state government. The key components are:
1) Reducing the state workforce by at least 10% immediately.
2) Eliminating state funding of local schools. Education should be paid for by the users, not taxpayers in general.
3) Instituting a plan for the financial independence of Rutgers, the state colleges and community colleges.
4) Phasing out social welfare spending over the next five years.

The above broad outline is consistent with the state constitution. As Article I, Paragraph I states:
All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain natural and unalienable rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and of pursuing and obtaining safety and happiness.

Although he took his oath of office more than a year ago to defend the state constitution, Jon Corzine’s mantra is: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.” That’s the message Governor Corzine will be heralding over the next 30 months as his reelection campaign gears up.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is director of the Center for Business and Public Policy

City Ethics: A One-Stop Shop for Municipal Ethics

Residents of New Jersey and, in particular, municipal employees and officials, have a new place to turn to learn about city ethics and programs regarding best practices in government ethics: City Ethics (http://www.cityethics.org/). Recently, two new projects were instituted by City Ethics, an organization that originated out of the Municipal Division of the Council on Government Ethics Laws (COGEL). The projects include a blog about municipal ethics and a Model Municipal Ethics Code Project, both available at http://www.cityethics.org/

The municipal ethics blog includes analyses of news items and the opportunity for readers to post comments and create a dialogue about contemporary issues in municipal ethics. For example, recently, Robert Wechsler, Research Director for City Ethics, posted a California Supreme Court decision (People v. Chacon, February 8, 2007) that held that a council member accused of a conflict of interest could not use as a defense that she acted based upon the advice given to her by the city attorney. The blog also includes discussions about government ethics issues as well as book reviews on relevant subject matter.

The Model Municipal Ethics Code Project, accessible at http://www.cityethics.org/mc/introduction, has recently gone online. It is structured to encourage municipal ethics practitioners to share their ideas and experiences, best and worst practices, and enter into discussions about all of the elements of municipal ethics programs. By creating a forum for such discussions, municipalities throughout New Jersey and indeed the United States and beyond can develop cutting-edge ethics codes that are effective and thorough without having to reinvent the wheel.

Given that New Jersey has 566 municipalities, City Ethics (http://www.cityethics.org/) can serve as a useful site for municipal employees and officials to learn about best practices in municipal ethics and adopt meaningful and thoughtful ethics codes for their municipalities. In addition, since the topic of municipal and government ethics has become such a hot-button issue in New Jersey, residents of the Garden State can keep abreast of important developments in municipal ethics and contribute to the dialogue fostered by City Ethics, as well.

Michael M. Shapiro, Publisher and Managing Editor of ShapTalk.com, graduated from Rutgers College and Stanford Law School. Mike currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and Editor of The Alternative Press. Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com

John Farmer: Intellectual Laziness? Dishonesty? Or Both?

Murray Sabrin

In his recent Star-Ledger column about the 2008 presidential front-runners, former New Jersey attorney general John Farmer, Jr. wrote, “Reason, the magazine of libertarians -- libertarians, for those unfamiliar with the breed, are anarchists with a shave and a clean shirt -- brands McCain an "authoritarian maverick.”

After I read Farmer’s characterization of libertarians I sent him an email.

“Libertarianism is the founding principle of our nation. See the Declaration of Independence, if you have not read it yet (http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig2/doi.html). Libertarianism comes in many varieties: the "anarchist" tradition (no central or any kind of government, but a constellation of self governing communities), the limited government tradition (adhering to the Bill of Rights, sound money, and a noninterventionist foreign policy), and a left-wing tradition (focusing on civil liberties and communitarianism). All libertarians, for your information, are pro civil liberties.

“If we had a libertarian government in DC, there would be no welfare-warfare state in America, no Patriot Act, no invasion of Iraq, no plans to attack Iran, no military-industrial complex, no depreciation of the people's money, no redistribution of income, no war on drugs, no $8 trillion national debt. Instead, both Republicans and Democrats have given us perpetual war, the unsustainable--and immoral--welfare state, and an assault on our civil liberties.

“For you to disparage and dismiss the philosophy that led to the American Revolution indicates, in my opinion, your support of the welfare-warfare state headed by someone other than Bush.

“When you write about libertarians in the future, please take the time to offer more than a ‘sound bite’ and obtain the facts about the philosophy that is the basis for New Jersey's motto: Liberty and Prosperity.

“You should start your education about libertarianism by reading http://www.lewrockwell.com/. And, Representative Ron Paul, the libertarian Republican, may seek the GOP nomination for president. Check him out, http://www.ronpaulexplore.com/.”

For more than three decades I have been explaining in letters to the editor, book reviews, op-ed essays, radio and television interviews, a book on taxation and government spending, Internet and business publication columns, blogs, lectures, seminars, and speeches, e-mail updates to hundreds of New Jerseyans and other Americans, and two campaigns for public office, how free market, limited government principles will create a free and prosperous society. The message is getting through. Reality is proving libertarian analysis correct, because the welfare-warfare state is unraveling faster than the establishment intelligentsia wants to acknowledge. They are scared stiff of the Old Republic being restored in America.

John Farmer, Jr., a Whitman appointee, does not appear to be a deep thinker or intellectually honest. If he was, he would have devoted a serious column about libertarianism, which he could easily Google. Instead, Farmer does what most politicians do; create a scary picture of anti-establishment critics. Farmer wants his readers to equate libertarians with “anarchists”—i.e., bomb throwers who commit aggression. If Farmer knew anything about libertarians, he would acknowledge that the first principle of libertarianism is nonaggression. Farmer has the chutzpah to characterize (smear) libertarians with a point of view that is 180 degrees opposite of the libertarianism’s core belief: peaceful relations among all peoples.

In addition, for Farmer to call libertarians a “breed,” is an insult to the framers of the Declaration of Independence, and intellectual giants such as Lysander Spooner, H.L. Mencken, Henry Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, and hundreds of others who have made enormous contributions to economics, philosophy, law, journalism, literature, and other fields.

Libertarians are not barnyard animals that have been domesticated by some sinister cabal of “anarchists.” John Farmer and others who are so disdainful of libertarianism cringe at the thought of a free society. However, if America is to survive as a free nation, libertarianism will have to be resurrected to replace the statist ideology that John Farmer and virtually all members of Congress have embraced. When statism is relegated to the dustbin of history, Farmer and his fellow statists should thank the defenders of liberty and peace for ending the welfare-warfare state that is bankrupting-morally and financially--America.

Murray Sabrin, Ph.D., is professor of finance in the Anisfield School of Business, Ramapo College of New Jersey, where he is executive director of the Center for Business and Public Policy.

Why Meaningful Reform May Not Arrive Any Time Soon

The Governor works hard to create a fiscally responsible budget. He calls for legislative support for its passage. Many of the legislators whom the Governor needs to vote for the budget make demands that "Christmas tree" items be added to secure their vote. A few hundred are included so that the budget will pass. As a result, it passes but with hundreds of millions of dollars in additional unnecessary spending, upending the Governor's fiscally responsible good work.

The residents of New Jersey desire property tax reform and committees in the Legislature are created to tackle the issue. Committees actually develop some interesting concepts that could help alleviate the property tax squeeze in New Jersey. These ideas are gutted by the Legislature but property taxes are reduced through a spending gimmick that provides residents with a thousand or two off their property taxes, but with no meaningful permanent reform.

Some legislators propose a ban on dual office holding. Others publicly support the idea as long as all incumbent officials are grandfathered. After weeks of haggling, an agreement is reached. A last minute discrepancy between the Senate and Assembly versions of the proposal stalls a ban on dual office holding for the foreseeable future. Even if the ban is eventually enacted, current office holders will likely still be grandfathered. Since incumbents win re-election 90%+ of the time, it seems that dual office holding will remain with us for decades.

These three situations all occurred during the past year and have resulted in chest pounding by Legislators who proclaim that they are reforming how business gets done in Trenton. In reality, however, little has been accomplished save some favorable sound bytes politicians can use during the upcoming legislative campaign.

Why has this been happening? Unfortunately, it is against the Legislators' own self-interest to reform Trenton and improve politics in our State. When dual office holding is banned, it cuts off an opportunity for legislators to benefit themselves at the public trough. A fiscally responsible budget may be the best thing for New Jersey's economy and its citizens, but it eliminates the ability of legislators to bring home "pork" for their districts and/or their contributors, supporters, and relatives. Similarly, reforming property taxes in New Jersey requires tough decisions if meaningful reform is to take place. What legislator up for re-election wants to make a tough decision and face the wrath on Election Day?

If true reform is going to take place in New Jersey, it will need to be led by citizens who demand more from our elected officials and hold them accountable. Aggressive law enforcement, from the Attorney General's Office down to the municipal prosecutor, is needed to root out corrupt and/or unethical officials. It will take courage by those in power to be willing to upset the status quo to benefit the residents of our State. An active media that functions as a watchdog instead of a lapdog is also a necessity.

Meaningful reform can be achieved. It challenges all of us to play our part and work in concert for the betterment of our State and her future.

Michael M. Shapiro, Publisher and Managing Editor of ShapTalk.com, graduated from Rutgers College and Stanford Law School. Mike currently serves as the Chairman of the New Providence Democratic Party and Editor of The Alternative Press. Contact Mike at mike@shaptalk.com