fbpx

Christie: New Hampshire governor trying to ‘increase her own visibility and run for the next job’

Graphic by Robert Hazelrigg, RobertHazelrigg.com

Graphic by Robert Hazelrigg, RobertHazelrigg.com

TRENTON — While traveling in New Hampshire on Monday to test the waters for his possible 2016 presidential run, Gov. Chris Christie said Democratic Gov. Maggie Hassan seems more focused on running for higher elected office than taking care of her own state. “The way she’s governing now and what she did in 2012 and 2014… Read the rest of this entry »

Posted: February 19th, 2015 | Author: | Filed under: 2016 Presidential Politics | Tags: , , , | 6 Comments »

Christie discloses presidential platform for the first time

New Hampshire 21615CONCORD — Gov. Chris Christie gave the first glimpse of what he’d do if Americans elected him to the White House while speaking to New Hampshire Republicans in the presidential battleground state tonight. “Within the first 100 days, if I were to run for president and be elected, we would change this tax system in this… Read the rest of this entry »
Posted: February 17th, 2015 | Author: | Filed under: 2016 Presidential Politics, Chris Christie | Tags: , , | 3 Comments »

Raising Income, Sales Taxes Didn’t Lower Property Taxes

By Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande

What do Florida, New Hampshire and Washington state have in common?

They’re among nine states that not only weathered the worst economic recession of our generation, but found ways to make their economies stronger, attract new people and create jobs when the rest of the nation floundered.

From 2001 to 2010, these nine states saw employment increase by 5.4 percent when the rest of the country remained stagnant.

What do these states have in common that allows them to grow jobs during horrific economic times?

No income tax.

In New Jersey, we’re on our way to replicating the job-creating economic successes of these “prime nine” states, even though we’re still among the “maligned nine” states with the highest income taxes.

The tax-free states grew employment by 5.4 percent, while tax-heavy states saw jobs decline by 1.7 percent.

That’s why Gov. Christie is proposing to cut income taxes for everyone. It will keep money in people’s pockets and help bring back the jobs that disappeared last decade as Trenton taxed and spent the state into economic ruin.

The Wall Street Journal recently called legislative proposals in other states to cut the income tax good “long-term growth” and attempts to use additional income tax revenue to relieve property taxes “short-term politics.”

It’s not even good short-term politics. Remember what happened to Jon Corzine in 2009 when he raised income taxes? He was one of nearly 120,000 New Jerseyans who lost a job that year.

Franklin D. Roosevelt, who knew something about emerging from horrific economic times, once said: “Do something. If it works, do more of it. If it doesn’t, do something else.”

New Jersey has repeatedly tried raising taxes to relieve property taxes. It has never worked. In fact, the income tax itself began as a way to reduce property taxes. Do you know anyone whose property taxes went down since 1976?

New Jersey lost an entire decade (and 156,000 jobs) proving you can’t lower one tax by raising another. Taxes increased by $11 billion from 2002 to 2009, and nearly every time they increased a tax, Trenton politicians promised it would relieve property taxes, yet the property tax burden increased 6 percent per year and 60 percent cumulatively from 2002 to 2010.

Remember when Trenton politicians shut down the state to raise the sales tax in 2006 to offer “historic” levels of property tax relief? It didn’t work. The higher sales tax remains, but the property tax relief was history after just one year.

We need to stop doing what doesn’t work. That’s why we ended those failed tactics and launched the most aggressive and effective assault on property taxes in New Jersey history.

We put a tight cap on property taxes, saved property taxpayers $120 billion over the next 30 years through pension and health care reform, and we are working to do more, such as ending the payout for workers’ unused sick and vacation time and allowing towns to save money by opting out of Civil Service.

Our comprehensive approach to tax reform has businesses and homeowners optimistic about our state’s future for the first time in several years.

If we continue to do what has been working, we will continue to create more private-sector jobs in addition to the 60,000 that have been added in the past two years.

Adding jobs won’t just improve our unemployment rate, but likely will achieve precisely what short-sighted critics of Gov. Chris Christie’s income tax cut say it won’t: property tax relief.

Raising other taxes has not lowered property taxes, but reducing the income tax may because it will keep forcing government to spend within its means while encouraging businesses to create jobs in New Jersey.

More businesses and jobs in our economy means a greater share of the tax burden is shifted away from property taxpayers.

Many other states have seen the wisdom of low income tax rates. They know that reducing the income tax burden creates jobs and builds a strong economic foundation. I’m eager to see New Jersey follow suit.

In the last two years, New Jersey has added more than 62,000 private-sector jobs. And our Economic Outlook Rank has improved from 48th to 45th this year, according to the American Legislative Exchange Council.

Our plan to make New Jersey affordable and create jobs is working. We can’t stop doing what is working. We need to do more.

Posted: March 9th, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: Art Gallagher, Caroline Casagrande, Taxes | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

In Search Of The New Jersey Presidential Primary

By Bob English

With the Presidential primary season well under way, we are now being treated to candidates going from state to state almost every week in an effort or convince voters that they are the right person to lead the country. If you are wondering when the candidate train stops in New Jersey, well I have some bad news. Last September, the Lieutenant Governor signed a bill approved by the Legislature, which moved the New Jersey 2012 Presidential Primary from February (when it had been held in 2008 on the 5th of February aka “Super Tuesday” ) to June 5, 2012. In 2005, the Legislature had voted to move the 2008 primary which had normally been held in June, to February in an effort to try to give New Jersey voters more influence in picking their party’s Presidential candidates. In 2008, despite the fact that New Jersey’s primary was held on the same day as those in over 20 other states, several candidates did campaign in New Jersey despite it not getting as much of a national focus as had been hoped for. Over 1.1 million residents voted in the 2008 New Jersey Democratic Primary which was won by Hilary Clinton over Barack Obama. In the Republican contest, over 500,000 people went to the polls in an election that saw the party’s eventual nominee John McCain almost doubling the amount of votes received by the 2nd place finisher Mitt Romney. It was estimated that the cost of moving the primary from June to February was $12 million.

What makes the participation numbers interesting is when you weigh them against the number of voters taking part in the first two caucuses or primaries this year. Roughly 122,000 people voted in the Iowa Republican caucuses with approximately 250,000 people voting in the New Hampshire GOP Primary. Although there was a Democratic caucus in Iowa and a primary in New Hampshire, they were not competitive races with President Obama virtually unopposed for his party’s nomination. With several Republicans dropping out of their party’s contest just before, during or right after these races, the amount of influence these states have in choosing a party’s nominee is hugely out of proportion to the numbers of voters who take part. Contrast these participation numbers with those of the 2008 general election where close to 130 million voters went to the polls.

So the questions that beg for answers are 1) How can New Jersey residents become more influential in the process of picking their party’s candidate (besides moving to Iowa or New Hampshire for a few months every four years)? 2) What can be done to make the choice of each party’s nominee less dependent on voters in one or two states where they clearly have to much power and contain voters whose views are not always representative of the majority of voters in other states. Note that major issues in Iowa where farm subsidies, ethanol, religion/faith and social issues. One thing is for sure, none of those three would be the top issues for the majority of New Jersey voters. There are no easy answers to question #1. The major party’s threatened loss of convention delegates to States which were going to hold their primaries too early in the 2012 process. One idea for 2016 would be for the state to revert to the 2008 model and possibly schedule its primary in mid/late February or early March of 2016 (This also depends on party scheduling rules that can change.) As mentioned above, this change does come with additional cost ($12 million) and there is no guarantee that the nomination for one or both parties would not have been secured by that date.

The other idea which has been debated for several years, is holding a series (4-6) of regional primaries in the early March to early June time-frame. The order of these would rotate every four years. This would give more states greater influence in picking the eventual nominees. Even if Iowa and New Hampshire kept their traditional places at the starting gate, they would not have the same importance or as great a focus on by candidates.

Since 1976, only 3 of the 18 nominating contests were so close that almost every delegate mattered to the eventual nominee. A couple of interesting historical facts about New Jersey Presidential Primaries are:

In 1972, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm won the states Democratic Primary. Rep. Chisholm was the first woman to run for the Democratic Presidential nomination and the first major party African American Presidential candidate.

In 1976, in an unsuccessful effort to stop Jimmy Carter from obtaining the Democratic nomination, a slate of uncommitted delegates backing Senator Hubert Humphrey and then (and current) California Governor Jerry Brown, defeated Carter by a wide margin. Carter’s primary win in Ohio the same day however, cinched the nomination for him. I attended a campaign rally for Governor Brown the day before the election at Airport Plaza in Hazlet on June 7, 1976. The story was the lead in the next days Red Bank Register and can be viewed here:

http://209.212.22.88/DATA/RBR/1970-1979/1976/1976.06.08.pdf

 

Posted: January 30th, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: 2012 Presidential Politics, New Jersey | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »

Santorum, After Iowa

By Robert Costa, National Review Online

Des Moines, Iowa – One hot August night in Ames, Rick Santorum stood on the mat-covered basketball court at Iowa State University’s Hilton Coliseum. As pop-country songs played softly over the arena’s loudspeakers, he huddled with his wife, Karen. Few people noticed him, and his handlers, if he had any, were elsewhere. Reporters breezed past the couple, hustling to chat with big-name strategists working for Mitt Romney and Tim Pawlenty.

 

A couple steps away, under a cavern of Klieg lights, Sean Hannity of Fox News bantered with Michele Bachmann, the Minnesota congresswoman, who was widely expected to sweep the upcoming straw poll. Santorum, surveying the scene, scowled. As he waited for Bachmann to finish the interview, he tapped his foot, like a backup player itching to get into the game. Once again he had participated in a Republican primary debate, and once again he was a bench-warmer.

 

Minutes after the televised spar, here he was, in a post-debate “spin room” stuffed with political junkies, and he was ignored – an also-ran, a B-list pol waiting to appear on cable. The proud, boyish-looking former Pennsylvania senator was miffed. “This is unbelievable,” he told Karen, shaking his head. “Two questions in the beginning, and I had to wave my hand to get them.”

 

Five months later, on a bitterly cold January morning in central Iowa, Santorum’s summer doldrums have largely evaporated. All week, as he has greeted burly voters, many of them decked in Carhartt jackets, he has been swarmed by hundreds of media types – print reporters, network producers, camera-toting Swiss bloggers – out in force to cover every move of the man who, quite suddenly, has shaken up the GOP presidential scramble.

 

But Santorum’s sustained buzz in Iowa’s small diners and Pizza Ranch restaurants is not due in any way to his celebrity or his charm. His usual outfit – single-color, slightly pilled sweater-vests over a pressed white shirt – is the look of the ill-at-ease soccer dad, not the confident frontrunner. His remarks are always delivered rapid-fire, are frequently testy, and are too often focused on long-forgotten legislative yawners. Regardless, Iowans have flocked to him at the eleventh hour, partly because they’ve soured on Bachmann and Gov. Rick Perry, and partly because he is the last alternative to Mitt Romney left, the nice-enough guy who has visited all 99 counties.

 

That’s just fine with Santorum, who tells me that he is confident that Republicans will nominate him, a “reliable conservative,” rather than “settle” on Romney. But as Iowans prepare to caucus, Romney’s well-organized and lavishly funded campaign looms over the Pennsylvanian’s upstart effort – the Death Star to Santorum’s X-wing fighter. Whatever the outcome tonight, the former Massachusetts governor will be a formidable competitor in the months ahead, as will Texas congressman Ron Paul, who has the money and ground game to stay in the hunt. And the rest of the field, should they choose to carry on, will give Santorum headaches, knocking him as they fade.

 

Of course, such a scenario depends on Santorum finishing in Iowa’s top tier, near or above Paul and Romney. The latest polls hint at this happening, but in this tumultuous primary season, most every reporter is wary of trusting any last-minute temperature-taking of the conservatives among the cornfields. Still, Santorum looks poised for a good night, and should he pull it off the real question becomes: What’s next?

 

To get some answers, I recently spoke with John Brabender, Santorum’s own Karl Rove – the senior strategist who has been with him since his first House race in 1990, when he toppled Democrat Doug Walgren, a seven-term incumbent from the Pittsburgh suburbs. Brabender tells me to keep an eye on seven factors as the Iowa HQ closes and the plane for Manchester is fueled.

 

Santorum will make a play for the Granite State: “We’re not like these other campaigns that look at New Hampshire, surrender, and say ‘We can’t be competitive there; we’re going to the South.’ We think South Carolina is extremely important, and we’re the only ones who’ve won a straw poll there. But we think that to be a legitimate presidential candidate, you have to, at the very least, be willing to compete in each region of the country,” Brabender says. “And that includes the Northeast. We’re not expecting to walk into every place and feel like we have to win, but by going to New Hampshire, it lets us continue a dialogue with the country. That’s where the press is, that’s where people are paying attention, and we want to show we have national strength.”

 

Santorum staffers are prepping for the long haul: “We knew this day would come,” Brabender says. “There is this perception that the senator, duffel bag in hand, has been wandering around Iowa, but behind the scenes, there is a lot going on.” In coming days, many of the top Iowa field staffers will be shifted to new roles in other early primary states, taking the turnout strategies and outreach techniques they honed in Iowa to South Carolina, New Hampshire, and Florida. “We’re not an expensive campaign, not a huge-bureaucracy campaign,” so there is flexibility in terms of personnel, he says. Regarding payroll, “we don’t need to bring in the same amount as other campaigns.”

 

New hires will begin in the finance department: “We’re probably going to make a few small hires,” Brabender says, and they will mostly be money raisers, “due to the uptick in donations that has really picked up in recent weeks.” Beyond that, “you’re not going to see some wholesale expansion. The biggest mistake we think we could make right now is simply trying to become the other candidates, running the same type of model that’s outdated. You can be sure we’re not going to do that.”

 

Santorum, more than ever, is at ease: Even Santorum’s confidants acknowledge that he can become frustrated and flustered at times. Republicans saw this side of him during the early stages of the primary, when he would complain about the lack of attention. Now that he’s ticked up in the polls and spent countless days crisscrossing Iowa, he’s “in the zone,” Brabender says. The candidate is peaking at the right moment. “He’s hitting his stride,” Brabender tells me. “The crowds are getting bigger, and when that happens, he feeds off of it. More than the typical candidate, he finds a way to ride that kind of energy, and you see him doing that right now.”

 

Santorum is comfortable as an outsider: When he lost his 2006 reelection bid by 18 points to lackluster Democrat Bob Casey Jr., Santorum’s political career nearly ended. He went from being a member of the Senate GOP leadership to a political nobody. Five years later, as he surges in the polls, Brabender says that loss is shaping Santorum’s perspective in innumerable ways, but most importantly in how it buoys his ability to speak about issues as both a former insider and a Beltway outsider. “He thinks it was actually beneficial for him to get out of Washington for a while,” Brabender. “It turned out to be a huge benefit as he began to look at a presidential run, since he came into this with fresh eyes, not as someone in a position of power.”

 

The family is “all in” after Iowa: Santorum’s large, growing family is slowly coming back into the spotlight, Brabender says, and his wife and children joined him on the trail in Iowa on Monday and will be with him all day today. In coming months, look for the older Santorum children to continue to show up at their father’s side, supporting him as he stumps. “Their son, John, delayed going to college this year to be part of the campaign, and their daughter Elizabeth is taking a year off from college to be part of the campaign, playing significant roles.”

 

The inner circle remains the same: “It’s not a big group,” Brabender says. “Hogan Gidley works at my firm, and he’s the communications director. He directs a small communications team. You have Mike Biundo, who’s from New Hampshire; he’s the campaign manager. You have Nadine Maenza, who’s the finance director and who’s been with the senator since the 1990s. There is also Mark Rodgers, Santorum’s former chief of staff, who works in a senior advisory role. And unlike many campaigns, we keep Rick and Karen as part of the strategic team.” There is also, he claims, little drama. “So many of us have been with Rick for many years, and there’s nothing like you’ve read on Politico about other campaigns and their infighting. We mostly spend our time looking over historical polling data for Santorum, seeing what we can apply to this race.”

 

“We all started together in Pennsylvania,” Brabender says, commenting on Santorum’s senior team. “And just as Rick grew, we all grew in sophistication, but none of us has ever lost our roots. At 4:15 p.m. on Sunday, you can be sure that we were all finding a place to watch the Steelers game.” Later tonight, they’ll all be tuned to the same channel, this time watching the caucus returns. On Sunday, the Steelers beat the Cleveland Browns. In a few hours, Brabender expects to be cheering once again.

 

– Robert Costa is a political reporter for National Review.

Posted: January 4th, 2012 | Author: | Filed under: 2012 Presidential Politics | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Santorum, After Iowa