New Jersey Senator Mike Doherty (R-23) has launched an online petition to support his efforts to put an end to invasive airport screening practices that have been implemented by the federal Transportation Security Administration (TSA). Doherty is the prime sponsor of a pair of Senate resolutions that urge Congress and the TSA to end the use of enhanced pat downs and advanced imaging scanners that allow TSA agents to see through travelers’ clothing.
“Travelers shouldn’t have to submit to potentially dangerous scans that allow strangers to view them naked, nor should they have to submit to invasive groping by government agents, just to get on a plane,” said Doherty. “Despite the massive public outcry against these invasive screening procedures, it’s seems that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington still don’t get it. That’s why we’ve launched our petition, to make sure that Americans concerned about losing their rights have an opportunity to be heard.”
Doherty’s petition to stop invasive TSA screening is located at http://doherty.senatenj.com/stopthetsa. The petition page includes video that provides information about the movement as well as features to easily comment on and share the petition on social media websites, including Facebook and Twitter.
“Together, we can send a message to Washington that enough is enough.We can tell the federal government that Americans want common-sense airport security that respects our constitutional rights,” added Doherty. “Filling out the petition takes only a few seconds, so head over now and make sure your voice is heard.”
Thanks to the Asbury Park Press making Middletown Mayor Gerry Scharfenberger the most famous Director of the Office of Planning Advocacy in the State’s history, the Middletown Republican Club has come up with a great stocking stuffer.
If you’re a TSA employee you’ll probably want to skip The Full Monty at the Count Basie Theatre and Playing Doctorat the First Avenue Playhouse. Seeing either of those shows would be too much like being on the job.
The United States government is now requiring people who wish to travel via airplane to submit to radioactive photography that exposes their nude body, or alternatively submit to a full body pat down.
Here for their first reading, I offer the fourth amendment to the U.S. Constitution to the editorial board of the Neptune Nudniks:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
What is the probable cause that justifies every airline traveler to be compelled to submit to these searches?
If you are selected for secondary screening after you go through the metal detector and it does not go off, and “sss” is not written on your boarding pass, ask the TSA officer if the reason you are being selected is because of your head scarf.
In this situation, you may be asked to submit to a pat-down or to go through a full body scanner. If you are selected for the scanner, you may ask to go through a pat-down instead.
Before you are patted down, you should remind the TSA officer that they are only supposed to pat down the area in question, in this scenario, your head and neck. They SHOULD NOT subject you to a full-body or partial-body pat-down.
You may ask to be taken to a private room for the pat-down procedure.
Instead of the pat-down, you can always request to pat down your own scarf, including head and neck area, and have the officers perform a chemical swipe of your hands.
If you encounter any issues, ask to speak to a supervisor immediately. They are there to assist you.
I don’t have a daughter, but I will be adding hijab to my Christmas shopping list for my wife, mother, sister and nieces. You can buy them online here.
The Legislators from Monmouth County would like to see further discussions take place before the latest recommendations on horseracing from the Governor’s Advisory Commission on Gaming, Sports and Entertainment are implemented.
Among the recommendations are calls for all racing that currently takes place at the Meadowlands Racetrack to be moved to Monmouth Park, the sale of Monmouth Park to a private entity, and drastically decreasing the number of live racing days for both standard- and thoroughbred tracks, below the current legal minimum.
The decrease of racing days, especially in the face of a lack of additional purse dollars, is a source of contention with this proposal, because racetracks earn their revenue through their live racing days. By cutting the number of days by 2/3 for both breeds, it limits the opportunity for the tracks to earn money.
“There is no disagreement that horseracing in New Jersey is in need of serious change at this time,” said Senator Jennifer Beck (District 12), “but what Mr. Hanson has recommended jeopardizes the future of the entire sport in the State. There is no feasible way that all of the racing that is currently taking place at the Meadowlands can be moved to Monmouth Park by 2011. The infrastructure does not exist at Monmouth Park to house harness racing, since it is, and always has been a thoroughbred park. Also, New Jersey State Law regulates the number of racing days at each of the racetracks, and any action to reduce the number of racing days will have to be done through legislative action. As far as I am concerned, after speaking with a number of experts in this area, the reduction called for in the report will severely damage the viability of maintaining any racing in the Garden State.”
“Horseracing in New Jersey was a sustainable, and even profitable, industry, right up until 2007 when competition began appearing on our borders,” said Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande (District 12). “It can be sustainable again, if given the opportunity. The recommendations from Mr. Hanson’s panel do not afford this opportunity. By forcing a sudden and drastic change, instead of one that takes into consideration, not only the logistics of preparing a thoroughbred track for an entirely different kind of racing, but the implications a change of this sort will have on the rest of the equine and equine-related industries in New Jersey, the report is inherently flawed. Further discussion and negotiations are needed.”
“The report is correct in saying that ‘the horseracing industry is at a crossroads, and didn’t arrive there overnight,’” said Assemblyman O’Scanlon (District 12). “Likewise, the solution to the challenges facing the racing industry can also not be expected to take place overnight. Expecting the significant changes that the Commission’s report calls for to take place in 2011 is unrealistic. The problems facing the horseracing industry are going to take a more measured approach to resolve.”
The Commission states its purpose as “to propose an economically sustainable model for the horseracing industry, without state subsidies,” and “to propose a plan that preserves the possibility of live standardbred and thoroughbred racing in the State.” The Monmouth County Legislators are not convinced that the plan that has been presented will accomplish either of these objectives and will continue to reach out to the Governor with alternatives.
“The recommendations of the addendum to the Hanson Report,” said Assemblyman Ronald Dancer (District 30), “will require legislative approval, and it is very important that the legislature be partners in the process to ensure that we preserve and enhance the horseracing industry, thus protecting jobs and open space. Unfortunately, the report fails to meet its own goal of preserving the racing industry. I look forward to working with the administration to draft legislation that will meet that goal by providing a sustainable business model for one of New Jersey’s most important job creating and open space preserving industries.”
“I am absolutely disgusted with the supplemental Hanson Report,” said Assemblyman Joseph Malone (District 30). “It totally disrespects the horseracing industry in New Jersey. It turns its back on thousands of working men and women in the State, and we need to do better.”
“I agree with the stated conclusion of the Hanson report that ‘the status quo is simply unsustainable’,” said Assemblyman Samuel Thompson (District 13). “There are some recommendations within the report that I agree with. Others I find very troublesome. I do feel we must take actions that will both preserve the horseracing industry in New Jersey and simultaneously reduce the drain on the states’ taxpayers. The proposals submitted require further work and modification to achieve these twin objectives.”
“Before the Hanson report proposals are enacted, we need to have a debate on how it will impact thoroughbred and harness racing—including looking at job loss and the negative economic repercussions,” said Senator Sean T. Kean (District 11). “Part of this debate should include opportunities for interested parties to weigh in on the proposals. In addition, during these deliberations we have to be mindful of how the horse racing industry preserves open space in Monmouth County and statewide. I am confident that the Christie Administration will work to find sustainable options for the horse racing industry in New Jersey.”
“The entire issue needs more examination before any rush to judgment occurs,” said Assemblywoman Amy Handlin (District 13).
Senator Joe Kyrillos told the Wall Street Jounral’s David Feith that he will introduce legislation this month that will legally empower parents to force administrative changes in failing schools.
“Parent Trigger” became law in California in January of this year. Under the California law, if 51% of parents in a failing school sign a petition they can force administrative changes in the school, convert the school to charter status or shut down the school entirely.
The idea was first proposed by the “liberal activists group,” Parent Revolution. Liberal or not, the idea enjoys bi-partisan support in California but is being proposed mostly by Republicans elsewhere in the country, according to the WSJ article.
Kyrillos is confident is bill will become law. He told Feith:
“If it can pass in California, it can pass anywhere,” says New Jersey State Sen. Joe Kyrillos, who plans to introduce his parent-trigger bill as soon as this month. Mr. Kyrillos is confident his bill will pass, especially since Gov. Chris Christie, a fellow Republican, committed in September to supporting the kind of parent-empowering reform that “was recently done in California.”
The Asbury Park Press reported yesterday that the Monmouth County Board of Freeholders balked at appointing Freeholder Director Lillian Burry’s choice to replace Jim Gray as Clerk of the Board.
Gray retired at the end of October. His salary was $109,748. Burry wants to replace Gray with James Stuart of Colts Neck, a semi-retired real estate appraiser, who would start the job at $60,000 if appointed.
Stuart served on the Colts Neck Township Committee with Burry. He served the township for nine years through 2008. He also had a real estate sales license that hung in Burry’s Colts Neck Realty brokerage office.
Freeholder Amy Mallet (D) slammed Burry for political patronage in proposing Stuart. That is ironic coming from Mallet, whose unsuccessful running mate, Glenn Mason, was appointed the county Emergency Management Coordinator shortly after the Democrats took control of the Freeholder Board in 2009.
Freeholder John Curley (R) raised questions about Burry’s business relationship with Stuart which were echoed by Freeholder John D’Amico (D). Freeholder Rob Clifton (R) told the APP that we would wait and see what happens.
Sources tell MMM that Clifton and D’Amico are expected to join Burry in appointing Stuart at the next Freeholder meeting on November 23 over the bi-partisan objections of Mallet and Curley.
In these times of fiscal austerity, I think it is worth questioning this appointment and all appointments. Let me emphasis that I am not taking a position, pro or con, on this appointment, at least not yet. I’m simply raising questions and encouraging others to do the same.
The first question should be “Is the position necessary?” Even if the position is required by legislation, and I don’t know if the clerk of the board position is required, the question should be asked, at all levels of government.
The Monmouth County website describes the Clerk of the Board function as follows:
The Office of the Clerk of the Board of Chosen Freeholders provides the Board with the necessary information and background material on those matters requiring its attention.
The principal activities of the Clerk of the Board are to keep a book of the minutes and a record of the orders and proceedings of the Board. The Clerk of the Board has custody of the official seal of the County and all records, documents and other official papers relating to the property and business of the County.
The functions performed by the Clerk of the Board include:
recording the official minutes of the Board
handling Board correspondence
preparing meeting agendas
processing, filing and advertising ordinances, resolutions and the county budget
serving as a liaison between the public and the Board
administering and recording oaths of office
signing official documents
attesting the signatures of officers and officials
maintaining a receipt of service of legal documents;
acting as custodian for several county departments with regard to the Open Public Records Act (OPRA)
directing correspondence and inquiries for action to various county departments
conducting business with other county departments as directed by the Board
Monmouth County’s Clerk of the Board’s office has a Deputy Clerk and three staffers. When the new clerk is hired that will be five full time people working to fulfill the prescribed functions. Record keeping and correspondence is important, but are all of those people necessary? Would there be a savings by promoting the Deputy Clerk and freezing or reducing the staff? Would the functions suffer? Does technology make record keeping and correspondence more efficient?
Another question, and this is not meant to single out Stuart, but to address widespread abuses. Is Stuart’s appointment a pension pad/grab? Does he have pension credits from his service on the Colts Neck Township Committee that would count towards years of service should he be appointed to this job. I don’t know in Stuart’s case. However such pension padding by part time elected officials has been so rampant over the years that the pension system, and abuse thereof, has obviously been a consideration when making such appointments in the past. It should also be a consideration, on the other side of the equation, going forward. If two people are equally qualified for a necessary position but one would add substantial pension costs if hired, those costs should be carefully considered in a hiring decision.
After a detente that lasted through the general election, the battle between CD-6 GOP rivals Anna Little and Diane Gooch seems to be heating up again. Little bested Gooch by 83 votes in the 6th district Republican primary last spring and went on to lose to incumbent Congressman Frank Pallone by 11%, which is the closest any Republican has come to Pallone since 1994.
Gooch didn’t exactly fade into the background after the primary, as is the custom for defeated primary candidates not named Lonegan. She stepped up her editorial writing in the TwoRiversTimes, the weekly newspaper she and her husband Mickey own. She formed Strong New Jersey, an issue advocacy organization that ran ads against John Adler in CD-3 and she funded an anti-Pallone ad for Voice for My Child.
Gooch returned the volley during this week’s edition of NJN’s On The Record with Michael Aron. She told Aron that if she felt she was the best candidate against Frank Pallone after the congressional districts are redrawn that she would run for the seat again. While praising the Tea Parties for the energy they brought to the campaign, Gooch said they made mistakes in some of the candidates they choose. She mentioned Delaware’s “I’m not a witch” Christine O’Donnell and Little as two of those mistakes.
Gooch’s appearance On the Record was broadcast this morning at 9 and 11. It will be broadcast again tomorrow at 6:30 am. As of this posting the program has not been posted on NJN’s website. If NJN’s webmaster follows the usual schedule, it will be posted here tomorrow after the final broadcast.
