Session Notes

We just did the budget. For the first time since I’ve been here we addressed it first, and got done with it fairly quickly.

Of course, it’s a monstrosity; about the best that can be said of it is that it’s not as bad as those since McGreevey took over.

Now, we’re doing school construction bonding, indebting the state to the tune of another $4 billion. Most of that money flows to Abbott districts, which have done such a wonderful job of maintaining their schools. (They have other priorities, such as building $200 million arenas, public swimming pools, paying their mayors a quarter mil per annum, etc.)

Interestingly, standing in the statehouse, a facility more than 200 years old, the sponsors contend that schools over 100 years must be replaced – at common expense rather than at the expense of the locals who will benefit.

The prime sponsor noted, in his comments, that this proposal was the reason he ran. Who could imagine that promising your constituents billions of other people’s money would be popular?

* * * * *

The Democrats have grown especially good at creative tax increasing.

According to law, a tax was supposed to expire this year. Can’t have that; it would deprive us of revenue we need to spend on distressed cities (aka urban pork), etc. So, the sponsor rises to tell us the money will be used to support charity care and for nursing homes.

Nonsense. The Bill dedicates not one nickel for those purposes. It simply falls into general revenue.

The Sponsor has a history of, er, creative tax justification. In the past, she’s supported tax increases, justifying them on the grounds that they’d underwrite an extra state police class, a new state helicopter, and additional snow plowing. We got the tax increase, but not the helicopters, the cops or the extra snowplowing.

More later, if motivated ...