Good Govt NJ Style - Hide the Senator!

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) has decided to come off his mountain and debate Dick Zimmer on November 1, 2008. The State of New Jersey is awash in government corruption scandals. The perpetrators in these scandals are almost exclusively Democrats. Lautenberg is allegedly one of the parties leaders and yet, he refuses to debate, speak or really appear in public that much.

At the heart of good government is the access citizens have to the process and the people who run it. Every citizen of this state has a right and a responsibility to hear from the candidates from elected dog catcher to governor to (yes, Mr Lautenberg) Senator. Yet, Frank Lautenberg refuses to even pretend that he has to act like he wants our votes. True, this state has a lot of people who will vote for this man because they are told to by their union or their boss. But there are also people in New Jersey that want to hear from the man.

But even then we are shortchanged. For example, in a recent Newsday story about King Frank agreeing to a late debate, there were plenty of quotes from Zimmer. But from Lautenberg-only a "spokesman". This was the same trend during the primary. Is this man even alive anymore? Can someone check his pulse? (I can't wait for a spokesman for Lautenberg to issue a press release that yes indeed, the senator is alive)

New Jersey citizens have a right to hear from you Mr Lautenberg.

Bailout is not the only option!

There was buzz the other day about a large number of economists that sent a letter to the congress suggesting that there was a better way to handle the mortgage crisis. Now today, Jeffrey Miron a Senior Lecturer of Economics at Harvard explains what the content of that communication included (from CNN):

The current mess would never have occurred in the absence of ill-conceived federal policies. The federal government chartered Fannie Mae in 1938 and Freddie Mac in 1970; these two mortgage lending institutions are at the center of the crisis. The government implicitly promised these institutions that it would make good on their debts, so Fannie and Freddie took on huge amounts of excessive risk.

Worse, beginning in 1977 and even more in the 1990s and the early part of this century, Congress pushed mortgage lenders and Fannie/Freddie to expand subprime lending. The industry was happy to oblige, given the implicit promise of federal backing, and subprime lending soared.

This represents well understood fact except for Democrats in the House and Senate (and much of the media as well). This statement really brings the issue home:

The fact that government bears such a huge responsibility for the current mess means any response should eliminate the conditions that created this situation in the first place, not attempt to fix bad government with more government.

So what to do?

The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company.

Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new (as has occurred with several airlines). Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of a businesses that remain profitable.

In contrast, a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. This "moral hazard" generates enormous distortions in an economy's allocation of its financial resources.

A massive transfer of wealth from taxpayers to Wall Street isn't the only answer. And congress should do their job and investigate every potential option with an eye toward the bill paying taxpayer first and Wall Street executives second.

Read the entire article here.

Nancy Pelosi can shut off the lights/cameras of congress on drilling but can't pass a bailout bill without Republican help?

A very interesting question. Why is it that the Republicans cannot even get an amendment to a bill to the floor when Czar Nancy wields the gavel are now awash with so much power in the House that a bailout bill can't go through? Doesn't anyone remember Nancy Pelosi shutting off the cameras and lights while the Republicans kept debating energy policy when the Democrats went on vacation?

But now, all of a sudden, she can't get a bill through without a small band of conservative legislators in the House? Oh I get it. It is because there were only about 4 votes from Republicans and the bill would have gone through as a piece of partisan Democrat legislation. Apparently, the Democrats do have some level of shame.

For you see, this bill has been crafted by Chris Dodd and Barney Frank. Remember these two. Chris Dodd got more money than anyone from Fannie and Freddie to look the other way while they continued to write bad loans. Chris Dodd also got a sweetheart deal from Countrywide as a "friend of Angelo". In most states, Chris Dodd would be in jail. But not in the senate. Oh, and don't forget Barney Frank. These are the people who are leading the bailout:



And even Nancy Pelosi knows that the media will not protect her if Nancy along with her Democrat colleagues were major contributors to the problem, failed in their oversight responsibility and enacted a flawed bailout with no opposition support. Even Nancy isn't that stupid apparently. Harry Reid on the other hand...

Federal Workers can make tax laws but won't pay!

From foxnews.com:

The Internal Revenue Service is trying to collect billions of dollars in late taxes from nearly half a million federal employees.

Documents obtained by WTOP radio through the Freedom of Information Act show the federal employees and retirees did not pay more than $3.5 billion in taxes owed last year.

Just like with Charlie Rangel and his lack of tax responsibility while reaching into others pockets, this is outrageous. But the article isn't finished:

The Executive Office of the President, which includes the White House, has 58 employees who did not pay more than $319,000. More than 1,000 Capitol Hill workers are on the list.

So 58 people in the White House don't bother to pay taxes. That's bad enough. But 1,000 people who work on the Hill? Are you kidding me? I wonder how many normal citizens are afforded the same courtesy. Frankly, the IRS should release exactly who these people work for and their role in the setting and execution of tax policy decisions.

Lautenberg - Let them eat cake!

From this article in Newsday:

Sen. Frank Lautenberg is facing some criticism over some comments he made to ABC World News about parties hosted by lobbyists.

In Denver for this week's Democratic National Convention, Lautenberg told ABC News' Brian Ross "with a smile" that it is his "duty" to attend the parties.

"Of course, you must visit, make sure that the food they serve is OK, that it passes the taste test and the liquor is the right vintage," Lautenberg said.

Is it not bad enough the we have a constant wave of Democrat politicians in this state being investigated, indicted and going to jail for influence related criminality? Now we are supposed to laugh off comments made by a Senator that owes his seat to another ethically challenged Senator (remember, NJ politicians don't retire, they go to jail).

Lautenberg does not serve the people in this state. He serves himself. Just as he told ABC.

They apologize for slavery but won't act on energy!

From the Associated Press:

The House on Tuesday issued an unprecedented apology to black Americans for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow segregation laws.

"Today represents a milestone in our nation's efforts to remedy the ills of our past," said Rep. Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, D-Mich., chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus.

But apparently, when it comes time to really help people in the United States, the House will not even vote on Energy legislation due to political reasons. From Reuters:

A partisan election-year battle over high gasoline prices and a Republican push to open more U.S. coastal waters and federal land to oil and gas drilling has brought work in the U.S. Senate to a halt.

God forbid they would do anything that would help everyday voters with gas prices. The House and Senate have stood idly by for too long while this country has no coherent energy policy. During the Clinton years, drilling in Anwar was passed. Clinton vetoed. And each year this country is more and more dependent on terrorist supporting nations for our oil. Losers every one.

Zimmer hold Lautenberg Accountable

For far too long, Senator Frank Lautenberg has been happy to thoroughly trash his opponents whether they are Democrats or Republicans. His engine to spew slime is as well known as the corrupt tactics that put him in office the second time around after his corrupt predecessor was forced to withdraw he bid for re-election. But in a response to an editorial, Dick Zimmer took some serious shots at Lautenberg record in this article from the Dailyrecord.com:

Our incumbent Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., certainly has never agreed with your contention that the gap between what New Jersey sends to Washington and what we get back is a phony issue. Back in 1982, when he first ran for the Senate, he complained that we ranked 45th out of the 50 states in the percentage of our tax dollars we got back from Washington and promised that he would change it. He certainly did. As your editorial correctly notes, we now rank dead last among all 50 states, a position we have held for many years. We currently receive back only 61 cents for every dollar we send to Washington.

These are serious words from a congressman with a solid track record of fiscal responsibility. While he will likely be completely sullied throughout this process by the Lautenberg machine, we shouldn't ignore some of the facts that represent our current Senator's record. Lautenberg will try to make this about Zimmers record while refusing to talk about his own. But he has one.

Lautenberg has not only failed New Jerseyans on the money we get from Washington, but he has failed us on the taxes we send there as well. He opposed the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 on the grounds that they benefit the "rich." But, because New Jerseyans' incomes are relatively high, our state benefited from those tax cuts 33 percent more per capita than the nation as a whole. In fact, 3.4 million New Jersey tax payers saw savings because of the cuts. If Lautenberg had his way, and those tax cuts never went into effect, the return on each dollar we paid in taxes would not have been 61 cents; it would have been only 58 cents. Yet, Lautenberg wants to repeal most of those tax cuts.

This piece is a must read. Let's take Senator Lautenberg to task for once.

CAGW - Tell your representative you want energy independence!

From the Citizens Against Government Waster comes a great utility. Follow this link and tell your Senators and Congressman that you want action on oil and gas policy!

Gill's Bill is Fishy

To understand your legislators, read their press releases. The PR for Senator Nia H. Gill's "Save New Jersey Homes Act of 2008" shows how little Gill (D-Essex and Passaic) understands the current fiscal crisis.

She says, "New Jerseyans are losing their homes at an alarming rate due to foreclosure and the home loan crisis which is going on nationwide." Fair enough, foreclosures are up. But then she adds:

The Legislature has an obligation to create a statutory scheme to allow protection for consumers who are struggling to live with the effects of a crisis created by the subprime lending practices of some predatory mortgage lenders.

Okay, I get it: mortgage lenders are evil. (Never mind the fact that nobody would own houses without them.) The best response to evil people is to pass laws that prevent them from hurting you (unless the evil person is Willie Horton, in which case the best response is to put him on furlough). So how should the New Jersey Senate's new law protect homeowners from "predatory mortgage lenders"?

The bill...would require mortgage companies to notify borrowers at 60 and 30 days prior to the date that the interest rates on their home loans reset. These notices would include information regarding the current interest rate under the introductory terms of the mortgage, the date at which the interest rate resets, an explanation of how the reset interest rate would be calculated, and the best estimate by the creditor of the amount of the monthly payment after the reset date. The notice would also include a list of alternatives the borrower can pursue prior to the reset date, including refinancing or renegotiating with the creditor, or applying for an extension on the introductory interest rate.

Ah, the solution is nagging -- forcing mortgage companies to spend millions on mailings to tell people things that they should already know.

Typical Democrats. In Godless, Ann Coulter said that writing letters to the New York Times is what people who don't fight do when they think they're fighting. This is the Senate's letter to the Times. It won't do anything -- if anything, it's an additional economic strain on an already strained industry -- but it will make them feel like they did something.

Where's the beef, then? Apparently, the Senate bill calls for more bureaucracy to ensure that

borrowers would be able to apply for an extension on the introductory mortgage interest rate, up to three years, if they could not afford the monthly mortgage payments after the interest rate resets. They would have to complete a certification of extension prior to the reset date, indicating that they do not have sufficient monthly income, after deductions for necessary living expenses, to pay the monthly payment on the post-reset mortgage, and that they agree to continue payments during the extension period of principal and interest calculated at the introductory rate. Eligible borrowers would still have to pay back the interest deferred during the extension when they sell their homes, and would forfeit the deferment of interest if the borrower fails to make regular payments during the extension.

...in other words, it puts the burden of absorbing the cashflow crunch onto the lender.

So the evil predatory mortgage lenders will be forced to spend more money on notifications to people and to do the things that they do anyway to avoid foreclosures, regardless of the lender's financial situation. This is in an industry that has seen billions of dollars in writedowns and tens of thousands of layoffs. The result is that they'll be more conservative in their loan-making, which will make it less likely that people will be able to afford New Jersey housing. (And have I mentioned property taxes recently?)

Good thing our legislators are spending their taxpayer-funded salaries thinking up ideas like this.

The press release for the Assembly's version of the bill (A-2780, link in PDF) deals with this fact in an even funnier way.

Finally, the legislation would benefit mortgage lenders by providing them with a continuing revenue source. Many lenders have had to close due to declining revenues linked to the loss of mortgage payments coupled by the additional expenses of having to own and maintain foreclosed properties. Lenders have stated they do not want to be real estate owners, particularly since the drop in real estate values means many cannot recoup their original investment.

Interesting. Before this bill, was there a requirement for lenders to foreclose on their borrowers? If not, then how does this "provide" them with a continuing revenue source? It simply forces them to do things that, if it were in their best interest, they would do anyway.

And as long as we're talking about their press release, consider their justification for the bill:

According to published reports, foreclosure rates in February 2008 – the latest month for which such statistics are available – were up 60 percent nationally over the same time from last year. A total of 223,651 homes received at least one notice from a lenders related to an overdue payment, with nearly half of the homes slipping into default for the first time.

New Jersey saw 53,652 foreclosure filings in 2007, a 34 percent increase over 2006.

Nationwide, over 2.2 million foreclosure filings – including default notices, auction sale notices and bank repossessions – were reported on 1.3 million properties in 2007, a 75 percent increase over the prior year. In excess of 1 percent of all U.S. households were in some stage of foreclosure during the year.
Industry analysts estimate that nationwide another 1.5 million mortgages are due to reset in 2008 and that as many as three million subprime mortgages could end up in foreclosure over the next three years.

They're trying to mislead us somewhat, of course -- the 2.2 million filings are up by 75% nationwide, but we're talking about 1.3 million properties -- but even if you look at the things they say in a straightforward way you see that things aren't as bad as they seem.

• "Nationwide, over 2.2 million foreclosure filings...were reported...in 2007, a 75 percent increase over the prior year", but "New Jersey saw...a 34 percent increase" in filings. That tells me that we're doing half as badly as the rest of the country.
• "In excess of 1 percent of all U.S. households were in some stage of foreclosure during the year" tells me that more than 98% of all U.S. households are not in dire straits.

Which makes this comment by Assemblyman L. Harvey Smith (D-Jersey City) all the more galling: "We must act, and act swiftly, before an entire generation of New Jerseyans are forced to join the ranks of the homeless."

I'm convinced that we need to reform our school system just so we can stop calling 1% of New Jerseyans "an entire generation" and to stop calling a 50% increase "a half a penny".

Lautenberg is a liar!

Here's a funny one. I have no dog in this hunt but I just saw Senator Frank Lautenberg's add trashing his opponent Rob Andrews over the Bush tax cut. Just for the record, Democrats should stop being so naive and stupid in this state about who and what they are. The average wage in our state (one of if not the highest in the nation depending on what study you read) put most NJ earners into the 'rich' category that the press so despises.. And Frank Lautenberg knows this.

But he is willing to trash a colleague who dares challenging him because he votes in the best interest of the voters in NJ. I don't agree with a lot of what Mike Andrews agrees with but his fiscal and tax policy votes are not bad. Lautenberg's are because like Jon Corzine, he is a rich guy who has frankly no idea what it is like to raise a family here under the current tax first and ask questions later philosophy of our current Democratic party in NJ.

Frank Lautenberg doesn't give a damn about the average New Jersey taxpayer. Why do I say that? Because of the fact that if he were any kind of leader, he would be pressuring his party to stop spending like drunken sailors and driving earners and businesses from the state and start building an attractive climate for families and small business to thrive. I am not even sure he is alive any more. Given the level of corruption in this state, he may have passed long ago (I know this is tasteless but outside of FL's re-election campaign, no one give a hoot).

He is a throwback who New Jersey voters should literally throw back to his retirement mansion and move on. I could actually vote for Andrews because he seems to understand that Reid and Pelosi are not good for our state when their rhetoric is bad for New Jersey. Lautenberg is not our friend. He is just another rich guy with a conscience problem. He would be better off spending his own money to help the alleged community he blathers on about.

Isn't if funny that Mike Bloomberg in NY, while having a ton of policies I don't agree with puts his personal money where his mouth is when our NJ rich guys like Corzine and Lautenberg continue to feed themselves at the taxpayers expense.

Why can't we get rich guys that aren't parasites in this state?