|
As the only candidate for Governor who has actually voted against new state taxes and tax hikes, I don't have to ask you to trust my word on the issue. Instead, you can rely on my proven record of opposing state tax increases in Trenton, whether proposed by Democrats or Republicans. In fact, my opposition to two separate gas tax hike proposals helped save New Jersey taxpayers literally billions of dollars over the past decade.
State revenues have increased by 50% over the past eight years, yet Governor after Governor has failed to make ends meet and demanded that all of us pay even more in state taxes. The time has come to put an end to this reckless attitude, and I will do so as New Jersey's next Governor. I will veto any tax hike proposal that passes the Legislature and use the line item veto to reduce state spending, so that higher state taxes aren't needed. The way I figure it, we already pay more than enough taxes, especially when you compare our tax burden with taxes in surrounding states.
Now, some candidates for Governor are promising lower state income taxes, lower business taxes, low taxes on small business, and a new two-thirds legislative majority requirement to raise state taxes in the future. These are all fine ideas, but all of them depend on legislation passing a Democrat-controlled Legislature that has done nothing but raise taxes for the last eight years. Based on my state experience, I don't believe such campaign promises are realistic, and neither should you.
Over the years, I have sponsored bills in the Assembly to reduce or repeal state taxes, and neither Democratic nor Republican administrations have shown any inclination to support them. Even as Governor, I would not have the power to force the Legislature to pass legislation lowering state taxes. But I certainly would have the power to stop any tax hike proposals in their track, and I would exercise this veto power as often as required to protect New Jersey families from further state raids on their wallets.
The real trick to reduce taxes is to systematically shrink the size and cost of state government to a point that even the Legislature is compelled to admit to the public that it has more revenue than it needs. A Governor who enforces this restructuring and refuses to let the Legislature spend freely creates an environment in which state tax cuts become not only possible, but politically attractive to legislators. And, that, my friends, is the best way to encourage lower state taxes in New Jersey.
|
|
New Jersey is presently suffering the throes of the worst economic downturn in decades, and the current administration doesn't have a clue what to do about it. Hundreds of thousands of our fellow citizens are out of work, and the Governor thinks that paying a $3,000 per job bonus to employers for hiring people will solve the problem. His response is well-intended, but woefully inadequate and short-sighted. We need a far better thought out approach, one that addresses the underlying causes of New Jersey's economic decline.
For years, our state's business climate has been getting worse due to higher taxes and an ever-increasing regulatory burden. New Jersey is now rated as the worst place in the United States to do business, and hundreds of thousands of productive residents have fled the state in recent years. So, what can I do as our next Governor to turn things around?
For starters, I can and will use my powers as Governor to immediately lighten the load of regulation on New Jersey business. State government will be reorganized to allow businesses to deal with just one state department for licenses and permits, rather than having to navigate the current maze of state agencies. The idea will be to create "one-stop" regulatory shopping for businesses, so that complying with regulatory requirements is faster, easier, and less costly than at present. New Jersey will be more attractive as a place to do business when people are free to run their companies, instead of battling the state bureaucracies. My administration will encourage private entrepreneurial spirit as a better solution to New Jersey's job needs than central planning dictated from Trenton.
Secondly, I will review all state regulatory requirements to determine whether they are really necessary, as opposed to hidden tax opportunities for the state. The goal will be to reduce the number of permits, licenses, etc. a business needs to a more reasonable and manageable number. New Jersey depends on private industry to provide five out of every six jobs created in the state. It's about time we made it easier for private industry to operate and grow in the Garden State, because our residents' future employment depends on it, and with it, our state's stream of tax revenues for needed public services.
Thirdly, I will encourage the Legislature to pass legislation lessening the tax burden on business, pointing out that economic growth is essential to expanding state revenues over the long term. The flip-side to this is that I will refuse to sign anti-business bills passed by the Legislature that would further damage New Jersey's already unsatisfactory business climate, recognizing that a state without business is a state without a future.
|
|
The next Governor of New Jersey will appoint at least four justices to the seven-member New Jersey Supreme Court, giving him a golden opportunity to reshape the majority on the court. I will not reappoint any incumbent justice whose term expires while I serve as Governor. Instead, I will nominate qualified new justices whose professional background and experience demonstrate a proven commitment to judicial restraint and respect for the separation of powers among the branches of state government.
New Jersey's Supreme Court has a long history of judicial activism, exploiting causes brought before it to change state policy and even alter the New Jersey Constitution, in clear contravention of the separation of powers clause in Article III and amendment provisions of Article IX. The court has escaped scrutiny of its actions because the justices themselves act as final arbiters of its powers under the state constitution. They are not answerable to the people for their decisions, and this lack of accountability has led to a "bootstrapping" of judicial authority over the past several decades.
The New Jersey Supreme Court has rendered itself the supreme authority on school funding, land use, and a host of other public policies, all ostensibly under the aegis of the state constitution. This unhealthy and undemocratic situation can be remedied most quickly by changing the composition and prevailing culture of the court. As Governor, I will have both the authority and duty to undertake this transformation through the appointment process.
Background
The people established courts primarily for the purpose of obtaining unbiased verdicts in cases brought under the law. Unbiased verdicts demand that the decision-maker -- whether a judge or a jury -- be impartial and have no personal interest in the outcome of the case. A court that fails in this most fundamental judicial duty forfeits its legitimacy.
This quality - impartiality -- is the hallmark of a credible system of justice. Courts that forget the people's reason for establishing them and take or have an interest in the outcome of cases before them cannot function as impartial, honest brokers in disputes brought before them. Such courts go beyond their delegated powers and exhibit contempt for the popular charter upon which their legitimacy depends.
The notion that judges are free to alter or amend the law as they see fit offends the principle of unbiased verdicts rendered according to the law, as well as democratic institutions. Justice depends upon an impartial application of a fixed set of rules to decide whether past conduct is wrongful or even criminal. Judicial decisions that alter existing legal standards or obligations after the fact deny parties unbiased verdicts in their cases.
The other legitimate purpose for which the people have established an independent court system is to judge the consistency of executive and legislative actions with the fundamental law established by the people themselves, namely the New Jersey Constitution. State courts are obligated to give precedence to the state constitution, and they may enjoin application of a statute or executive action that conflicts with it. However, no court is at liberty to amend the New Jersey Constitution as it may deem appropriate or to take advantage of it to aggrandize the judiciary's authority. |
|
|
At last count, New Jersey presently has an unfunded public pension liability of roughly $60 billion and an unfunded health insurance benefits liability for retired public employees of about another $60 billion. It is obvious to most folks that governments (and taxpayers) in New Jersey cannot afford to continue the present public pension and health insurance benefit plans indefinitely. The public pension system - which is a classic "defined benefit" retirement plan must be phased out over time and replaced with a "defined contribution" retirement plan for public employees. At the same time, active public employees must pay a reasonable share of the cost of their health insurance premiums, so the system remains solvent over the long term.
A key element to acceptance of this transition from the "defined benefit" public pension system to the "defined contribution" public retirement system is that the change must be phased in over time, so as to be fair to public employees who have devoted their working lives to public service. However, new public employees should come into their jobs understanding that their retirement plan will be a "defined contribution" plan from the start, so that taxpayers are not left holding the bag for an ever-expanding unfunded public pension liability.
Secondly, proper funding of existing public pension liabilities must become a regular part of the public budgeting process, rather than an "add-on" whenever extra revenues happen to be available. Postponing public pension contributions just delays and increases eventual public pension costs, so it is both more responsible and less costly to budget for liabilities as they accrue, instead of putting off the Day of Reckoning, as New Jersey has foolishly done for years.
With respect to health insurance benefits for active public employees, the state should benchmark itself against employee contributions prevailing in the private sector in New Jersey and gradually work public employee contributions toward approximate parity with what is going on in the private sector. I will also encourage the Legislature to consider Medical Savings Accounts as a more cost-efficient way to let public employees who wish to manage their own health insurance costs as they think best.
As a legislator, I have already proposed legislation to modernize New Jersey's pension and health insurance systems. As Governor, I will hold the Legislature's feet to the fire on this subject as part of a program of reform required to get New Jersey's fiscal house back in order for the sake of both taxpayers and public employees.
|
|
Use of eminent domain to take private property for public use must be limited to traditional public uses only. As a legislator, I have sponsored legislation to enforce this limitation on the exercise of government's condemnation power. As Governor, I will not only encourage the Legislature to pass this legislation, but make it policy in the Executive Branch, which comprises more than 80% of state government.
I will also act as Governor to halt state actions that exercise eminent domain without calling it what it is and without paying property owners the just compensation they are due. As an example, I will use the powers of my office to shut down the activities of the Highlands Council, which have unjustly deprived tens of thousands of New Jersey residents of the value of their property without providing just compensation to them.
Eminent domain is a necessary government power in some instances, but those cases must be limited to unavoidable public necessity, rather than mere convenience. The power of eminent domain is too great and too threatening to individual rights to allow it broad application.
|
|
For more than 35 years, the State of New Jersey - repeatedly prodded by the state's Supreme Court - has created and hiked tax after tax in a futile effort to fix failing public schools by throwing ever-larger amounts of money at the problem. This policy has been a demonstrable failure, yet the court and the public education industry insist that it continue anyway. As Albert Einstein once observed, doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different outcome, is a sure sign of insanity.
After more than a third of a century of failure, it's time to try something else; a new state school funding policy that does not shortchange (as does the present Abbott-driven state school aid formula) an astounding 80% of our schoolchildren. We need a new policy that does not pit region against region or discriminate against children based on their zip code. Above all, we need a new policy, focused on serving the needs of schoolchildren, that no longer subsidizes failure or rewards wasteful spending. In short, we need to kick the courts out of school-funding policy decision-making and try a new approach to solving the problem.
As Governor, I will move to block distribution of state aid to education unless it is based on giving every schoolchild in New Jersey equal access to state funding. Where public schools chronically fail their students, I will support a voucher system to let parents make best choices for their children. And I will use the appointment power of the Governor to reshape the present majority on the New Jersey Supreme Court, so that politically-accountable elected officials - not appointed judges - decide school-funding policy for the State of New Jersey. Failing public schools will no longer be subsidized indefinitely by taxpayers, nor will such schools be guaranteed students for a substandard education. We will do what is right, and change the education system where it is broken.
|
|
