More government “oversight”?

Murray Sabrin

The State Commission of Investigation issued a long awaited report on New Jersey’s public colleges and universities. And guess what the report uncovered? There could be better management and tighter financial controls at some institutions. What a news flash! Is there any institution or organization in America or in the world that does not need better financial controls? Of course not. So why all the angst?

Simply, Trenton lawmakers want more “oversight” (make that control) over the state’s colleges and universities after revelations that a lot of monkey business was taking place at UMDNJ. And by looking bad especially when one of their own is accused of having a no-show job at UMDNJ and steering more tax dollars to the university, we are witnessing another example of CYA.

The egregious management of UMDNJ should have taught both lawmakers and the public an important lesson, mixing government and education is a toxic combination. We must remember the old adage, “Those who control the purse strings, make the rules.” Both the governor and legislators believe they must extend great oversight of taxpayer assisted institutions because there have been insufficient financial controls in place. However, the remedy is as easy as ABC, require more documentation and accountability of expenditures. End of story. Public colleges and universities do not need more state government “oversight.”

In the meantime, there will be legislative hearings about some of the investigation’s findings, where some members of the Statehouse will grandstand before the cameras and express their outrage. However, where was the outrage when the Schools Construction Corporation blew $8.6 billion in no time?

What we are witnessing is nothing less than a setup for another power grab by the Trenton establishment to extend their paws in one of the bright spots in New Jersey, public higher education.

What the legislators should be doing is thanking the higher education community for training young men and women to be productive and responsible citizens in the Garden State, while state aid has been cut substantially in real terms during the past two decades. After all, the political establishment needs more workers in New Jersey to tax so they can continue their overspending.

For the long term, New Jersey’s state colleges and universities should become financially independent. That will take politics out of higher education once-and-for-all and preserve the mission of these institutions--to make higher education affordable for middle and lower income families.

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. He is the author of Tax Free 2000: The Rebirth of American Liberty. Sabrin writes a weekly column for www.usadaily.com and blogs for the Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, www.njvoices.com.

Genuine Leadership—A Pipe Dream?

As Governor Corzine’s tenure continues, it is becoming more and more apparent that he is realizing his vision of a fiscally responsible and ethical government will not come to fruition during either his current term or a second term, should he seek one. He took office thinking that his vast bank account would enable him to be independent and allow him to lead without owing anyone anything. It appears that he has come to realize that despite his bank account, the recalcitrant politicians in Trenton are reluctant to advance any reform that will cut them off from the public trough. Therefore, Governor Corzine’s reform agenda depends on Assemblymen and State Senators. As a result, his thoughtful ideas stand little chance of passage. For the greater good, Governor Corzine could bring about the kind of change he alleges he would like to see happen. However, he would have to forgo a second term, be willing to make lifelong enemies, and conceivably use some of his own assets. In short, the Governor would have to exhibit what many consider to be selfless genuine leadership. To that end, the following are some suggestions:

After the November election, Governor Corzine should first announce that he will not seek another term. Then he should declare war against all politicians living off the taxpayers, including double-dipping pension padders, those who use their office to benefit their outside business, and foes of meaningful reform. He should, instead, support a slate of reform candidates in both the 2009 Democratic and Republican Primaries. Using his vast resources, he could utilize every law on the books to infiltrate selectively chosen heavily-Democratic and Republican districts where a well-funded challenger could defeat the incumbent. He could then raise funds to recruit a full slate of Democratic or Republican committeepeople in every municipality in each such district. He should publicly endorse the slate of reform candidates and campaign with them and develop a team of genuine leaders from across the political spectrum which would stump throughout the state where they could most make an electoral difference. Likewise, in those same districts, he should actively attempt to oust all foes of reform in the County Party that is home to the district and fund credible challengers.

A well-thought out campaign with a blank check could result in the ouster of ten to twenty-five percent of the Legislature, creating enough votes within that body (when uniting with other reform-minded Democrats and Republicans) to enact the reforms the Governor would like to see implemented. At that point, with a year left in his tenure, Governor Corzine could truly reform New Jersey politics and leave behind a lasting positive legacy.

A pipe dream? Probably. But what an inspiring and exciting campaign it would be!

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

Is Murtha Running A Corporation?

By: Representative Scott Garrett

Each time my conservative colleagues and I draw attention to the growing problem of earmarks we hear the retort that they represent only a very small portion of the total federal budget. That can’t be denied, but what is undoubtedly true is that Members and lobbyists also spend a disproportionate amount of energy and time attaining these earmarks.

This energy is misplaced as we face a growing storm of entitlement disaster. Imagine fitting out your house with the finest plumbing system, electronically controlled showers, gold-plated faucets, and a $10,000 dollar toilet with heated seats. You sit back to admire all your investments and then find out that none of it is going to work because you have nothing left to pay the water bill.

We are rushing around gathering up earmarks—a $2 million dollar library named after a sitting Member of Congress, a $39 million dollar intelligence center, a $1 million infrastructure center that may or may not exist—while our increasing entitlement burden will wipe out our ability to fund any discretionary accounts in just a few short years.

And, make no mistake about it – those earmarks add up. While the average House Republican received $8.7 million and the average Democrat received $10.3 million in earmarked funds, the Speaker received some $67 million and Appropriations Cardinal Murtha topped the list at over $179 million in earmarks.

And these two numbers don’t include the earmarks that the Speaker and Chairman Murtha signed on with other members. No doubt, if those numbers were included there would be millions more added to each of their totals.

Congressional districts may be allocated by population, but earmarks are allocated by raw political power. The taxpayers of the fifth district of New Jersey and the twelfth district of Pennsylvania are equal in the eyes of the IRS, but when it comes to the way we spend those taxes there is gross disparity.

With the $166 million in defense earmarks that Rep. Murtha controls, he is no longer a Congressman; he is also the CEO of a mid-sized corporation.

Of course, these numbers don’t account for everything because we have no assurance that earmarks are properly recorded across all of the bills that come to the House floor. The SCHIP conference report was stacked with giveaways and yet the Democrat leadership certified that the bill contained no earmarks.

Speaker Pelosi promised real earmark reform and now we see just how hollow these promises were. Until we have real reform, it will be impossible to control our growing federal budget and ensure that the people’s money is responsibly spent.

U.S. Rep. Scott Garrett is a three- term Republican from the fifth district of New Jersey.

Consumer-driven Healthcare

By: Murray Sabrin

The fourth annual Sebastian J. Raciti Memorial Lecture was held last Wednesday on the campus of Ramapo College. The event is sponsored by the Center for Business and Public Policy and the Ramapo Business Network.

This year’s guest lecturer was Regina Herzlinger who holds the Nancy R. McPherson Professor of Business Administration Chair at the Harvard Business School. She is the author Who Killed Health Care: America's $2 Trillion Problem - and the Consumer-Driven Cure (McGraw-Hill, June 2007) and Consumer-Driven Health Care (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2004), the best-selling Market-Driven Health Care (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Perseus Paperback, 1999).

In her 70 minute presentation Professor Herzlinger explained how employers have become responsible for the health insurance of their employees. She also explained that our healthcare costs have skyrocketed because of the “iron triangle” of our medical system. According to Herzlinger, insurers, hospitals and Congress have no incentive to keep costs down. Hence, health costs continue to rise despite the promises made by the federal government that costs would be contained by more mandates, controls, regulations, and intervention in medicine.

The bottom line, according to Professor Herzlinger, is that no matter who wins the presidency next year, a consumer driven healthcare model will replace the current system over the next several years. That means employers will no longer be purchasing medical insurance for their employees. It means that individuals will have to educate themselves about medical insurance and health issues so they can determine the best insurance policy for their households. It means that we can achieve universal coverage without a single payer like Canada or England.

In short, Professor Herzlinger’s vision for healthcare will be an entrepreneurial model that has worked so well in other sectors of the economy where innovation, competition, low prices, and high quality serve consumers. Instead of relying on employers to provide us with insurance, we the people will have to become real healthcare shoppers in a more transparent medical sector that for too long has kept consumers in the dark.

Professor Herlzlinger’s new book is must reading for anyone who wants to understand how consumers will finally take charge of their healthcare needs, and how we can have universal coverage without a government takeover of the $2.2 trillion healthcare sector.

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. He is the author of Tax Free 2000: The Rebirth of American Liberty. Sabrin writes a weekly column for www.usadaily.com and blogs for the Star-Ledger, New Jersey’s largest newspaper, www.njvoices.com.

An Exodus from New Jersey: Why?

A recent study by Rutgers University shows residents of the Garden State are leaving in large numbers. More than 72,000 residents left New Jersey than arrived here just last year alone. As a result, tax revenue was reduced by nearly $700 million while New Jersey’s economy lost approximately $10 billion in personal income because of the exodus. The emigration is likely to continue and will only swell budget deficits in the years ahead. While Governor Corzine has stated that the exodus is the result of retirements and that is true to at least some extent, there is much more at play:

First, property taxes continue to skyrocket and are now the highest in the nation, pricing the elderly out of their homes and preventing young people from moving into the State. Second, housing prices in New Jersey are some of the nation's highest, discouraging people from moving into the State. Third, while New Jersey's social service system is still in the forefront of most, other states are beginning to make strides, reducing the gap in services between them and the Garden State. Fourth, traffic and congestion in New Jersey are only getting worse, causing air and water pollution and continual frustration to its commuters. Fifth, because of a rush for ratables, open space has dwindled as both residential and business developments have transformed this State’s once pristine landscape. Finally, residents have lost faith in the honesty and trustworthiness of the government running the State and are tired of seeing their hard-earned taxpayer dollars used to fund political corruption.

Each of these problems can be reduced, perhaps greatly, if our elected officials recognize that they exist and take the lead in helping to solve them. Such leadership must come from the top. Rather than simply dismiss the mass exodus of our residents as purely a result of retirements, Governor Corzine should urge that these other issues, which are impacting the number of people who are leaving New Jersey and the millions of residents still living in the State, be dealt with in an open, transparent, thoughtful and communicative process.

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

“Legalized Bribery” Continues Unabated

Despite the enactment of “Pay to Play” legislative initiatives throughout the State, legalized bribery continues unabated in New Jersey. Loopholes are continually being exploited to raise money for candidates and political causes on the backs of those with business before the government or those seeking to receive such business. As a result, the same breed of politician remains in power and those who contribute get a leg up on the competition when it comes to the awarding of government business.

Those who argue that the system is a necessary evil, because without it campaign cash would be hard to come by, are missing the boat. If people believe enough in a candidate or a cause or a political party’s platform, they will willingly open their wallets. That’s the whole point of political contributions: to show your support for a candidate or political party or cause. The truth is that the only reason those who justify the system may be right is because of the current state of politics in our State.

First, many candidates being offered up by both political parties are by-and-large the same type of uninspiring selfish politicians that have dominated the political landscape in our State for the past 50 years. These same candidates run endlessly negative campaigns filled with personal attacks and innuendo and little substance. They do not inform, motivate or inspire our residents, providing little reason for our citizens to dig into their own pockets to fund their campaigns.

Second, the political parties in New Jersey all too often offer little for our residents and thus receive a minimum in the way of financial support from them. The State Republican Party is on life-support, is relentlessly negative, and offers no meaningful solution to most of our State’s most pressing problems. The State Democratic Party, ensconced because of both the blue trend New Jersey has undergone in the last decade as well as the incompetence of the Republican Party, is sitting pretty with little fear of electoral retribution and thus has no reason to go out of its way to provide thoughtful and positive change for our residents. If the State Republican Party developed a meaningful and thoughtful platform that would provide real solutions to New Jersey’s vexing issues, residents of New Jersey would willingly fill their coffers. Similarly, if the State Democratic Party took a more vocal stand on issues of importance to New Jerseyans and showed it was truly working in our best interest, its bank account would similarly be enriched.

Third, most PACs and similar groups are nothing more than lobbying arms or masked campaign engines of the politicians and their supporters and a way to circumvent laws meant to reform politics and political fundraising. If PACs and similar organizations actually began to stand for something and that concept resonated with our residents, contributions would flow in.

It is undoubtedly true that eliminating legalized bribery in New Jersey will have consequences for our political system. More honest, better informed candidates with thoughtful ideas will have to be found and encouraged to run. The State Parties will have to offer a meaningful agenda for our State’s residents with real solutions to New Jersey’s problems, such as skyrocketing State debt and property taxes, not clever sound bytes and negative attacks. And PACs will have to find real causes to support and motivate residents to contribute to them. These consequences can only improve politics in New Jersey.

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

More SCHIPs to ponder

Murray Sabrin

For several weeks, leftists of all stripes have been criticizing President Bush for threatening to veto an expansion of the SCHIP program. The other day President Bush did veto the bill, and the Democrat controlled Congress will try to muster two thirds majorities in each chamber to override his veto.

Both the president and the Congress agree on the premise: the federal government and state governments are responsible for the healthcare of children. All they disagree on is how fast SCHIP should expand. Democrats want to put the “pedal to the metal,” while the president wants to increase the program incrementally.

Supporters of the SCHIP have asserted that the federal-state funded program that subsidizes health insurance for youngsters who do not qualify for Medicaid is not socialism. They are right. The SCHIP program is not a takeover of the medical profession. The federal government will not takeover or “run” the medical sector of the economy.

SCHIP is an example of welfare statism, a redistribution of income form taxpayers to beneficiaries of a heavily government subsidized. In short, SCHIP is a logical outgrowth of the New Deal/Great Society paradigm, “helping” people by making them even more dependent on government, i.e. taxpayers.

To assert that SCHIP is an unqualified success is to take a very, very moral relavist position. For example, what if an individual with a “heart of gold” successfully robbed banks and redistributed the loot to families with no health insurance. The robber, in this case, a compassionate soul who sees youngster having no health insurance, decides to do something about it. Taking from the haves and giving to the have-nots is outright theft. Can this act ever be justified in our society? Do the ends ever justify immoral means?

Yet, this is the essence of the SCHIP program. The government taxes (takes) the people in order to give their money to other people. Or, the government sometimes returns the taxpayers’ money to them in the form of “rebates,” or provides them for services they may not want or need.

As my late father used to say all the time, “Remember, there is a right way and a wrong way.” SCHIP has outstanding intentions. However, it is the wrong way to address the healthcare needs of low and middle-income families. Healthcare can once again become very affordable without subsidies if we eliminate all the barriers that prevent patients and doctors from making arrangements that are in their best interests. It is called healthcare freedom.

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. He also writes for www.usadaily.com and www.njvoices.com.

Corruption and the November Election

A recent Quinnipiac poll revealed that nine out of ten New Jersey voters believe that corruption is a “very serious” or “somewhat serious” problem. However, a sizeable majority of voters polled said that the issue would not sway their vote to the Republican column despite the announcement of several recent high profile corruption cases against prominent Democrats. What does this mean for New Jersey residents?

First, we can expect that there will be no Republican landslide in November’s legislative elections. Rather, it would not be surprising if the Democrats pick up a few seats in districts that have been trending blue yet are currently held by Republican incumbents.

Second, there will be a good deal of posturing by candidates from both parties attempting to claim the mantle for being a reformer or for being more ethical or honest than their opponent. This posturing is unlikely to lead to positive legislative changes after the election.

Third, don’t be surprised to see the Democrats unveil a reform plan in the next few weeks that will severely undermine the Republican Party’s ability to use the issue of corruption as a sledgehammer against the Democrats.

Lastly, we can expect an endless barrage of negative print, radio, and television ads with candidates attacking their adversaries for every real or exaggerated transgression and attempting to make their opponents out to be the poster child for corruption in New Jersey.

Despite the findings of the poll that corruption will not sway voters from one party to the other, both political parties would make a catastrophic mistake by ignoring the fact that so many New Jersey voters believe corruption is a problem. While New Jersey voters may not yet be ready to exact vengeance on politicians for corruption in our State, the number of citizens upset about this issue continues to climb. It is only a matter of time before New Jersey voters decide that enough is enough.

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