New Jersey, on the heels of successfully raising the sales tax from six to seven per cent without a revolt similar to the one that rode Jim Florio out of the Governor's Mansion has decided they will leave it up to voters to raise their own taxes. There are four public questions on the ballot this year, three of them are looking to mandate allocations of money. These alocations, if approved must be met before any of the revenue sources that traditionally fund the general treasury actualy get there.
In layman's terms, allocating this money means more money will be needed to complete the regular budget. This means fees and taxes will have to increase to make up the money these allocations mandate if the questions pass. So what are the pressing issues our legislators want us to legislate by public question, essentially voing for potentially unbridled tax increases to pay for them. (Public questions in NJ are not like public referendums, in NJ public questions are forwarded by Trenton or approval by taxpayers, usually asking to make minor wording changes to the state constitution or dedicate funding apart from the general treasury.)
Public Question 1: Dedicates annual revenue of an amount equal to a tax rate of 1% under the state sales tax for property tax reform.
So a few months after raising our sales tax rate by 1% to meet general treasury obligations they want to dedicate it towards property tax relief. So once it gets rededicated how does the treasury shortfall get readdressed, why by raising the sales tax again by another percent. So in essence it is asking voters to approve raising their own taxes! You are essentially voting to tax yourelf to provide tax relief.
Public Question 2: Stem Cell Research Bond Issue
There is no need to publically fund stem cell research. Lots of institutes, research labs and universities, and corporations are funding the research into stem cell research. It is embryonic stem cell research that needs funding. And why? Because embryonic stem cell research has never yielded any results. They are so far away from any solid results that the pharmaceutical houses and bio-meds are heavily invested in it. (New Jersey is far and away the bio-med/pharm capital of the world, without exception, if their headquarters isn't here than they have labs and offices.)
But the most telling aspect of this is that New Jersey's governor, Jon Corzine, made his hundred's of millions of dollars at Goldman Sachs... an investment company. He should know that is there was any potential in embryonic stem cell research Wall Street and the bio-med/pharms would be clmouring for a piece of the action.
Public Question 3: Green Acres, Farmland, Blue Acres, and Historical Preservation Act of 2007
Who could oppose a bond to dedicate a mere 200 million to buying open space, preserving farms, buying houses in historic flood zones, and historical property preservation? Well, I for one. If there was a not for profit established to conduct this work I would gladly donate to it, perhaps in excess of the money my tax burden for them would be. But the nagging fact remains that in the corrupt state of New Jersey a disproportionate amount of Green Acres and Farmland money goes to politically connected entities.
Much like Lee Iacocca did with the restoration of Ellis Island a quai-public/private collaboration could yield better results than simply shoveling tax money into the pockets of political allies. Plus the line in the law that says the blue acres funding will only be used to buy property from willing sellers in flood plains is reminescent of similar actions in the past when people were forced to sell only to have the property redeveloped. It smacks of eminent domain.
So yes I oppose all three of these public questions. And I hope any New Jerseyan's who read this vote no to public questions 1, 2, and 3.
Public question 4 is to change the wording in the consitution regarding who is eligile to vote. The current wording says "idiot or insane person" and suggests changing it to a more politically correct substitute. I hope everyone votes no for the first 3 questions and yes for the fourth. Not because I favor being PC, but so Trenton gets the message that we oppose their irresponsible tax and spend policies and that we read and understood the questions. In Trenton when a public question they want to pass is defeated they always blame it on the electorate not understanding the question.
All governments need to learn that their citizens are not a limitless source of cash they can go to everytime they want to spend more money.
No comments:
Post a Comment