As election season comes to a peak, the National Taxpayers Union is doing its part to educate voters on the issues that will impact future efforts to limit government and lower taxes. As such, we would like to bring to your attention an important measure that will appear on your ballot on November 4.
New Jersey taxpayers will vote on Public Question 1, which is an amendment to the state constitution mandating that any legislation that issues state authority bonds would require voter approval prior to its passage and execution, thereby injecting taxpayer oversight into the budgetary process.
As of June 2007, New Jersey had about $27 billion worth of debt, yet less than half of this ($11.9 billion) was ever approved by voters. While the New Jersey state constitution already requires voter approval for direct state borrowing, officials often circumvent this requirement by borrowing through government-chartered entities, such as the New Jersey Economic Development Authority or the Transportation Trust Fund Authority. Public Question 1 would put an end to these sneaky debt practices.
The New Jersey Taxpayers' Association is recommending a "YES" vote on Public Question 1.
You can read NTU's national 2008 General Election Ballot Guide here. The guide is for informational purposes only; it is not intended to provide endorsements or recommendations to voters.
We hope this information will be helpful as you prepare to vote!
Your NTU Grassroots Action Team
Posts
3 comments:
Ballot Question 2 is quite confusing...
I think I'm voting YES on that too, but question 1 is a no-brainer yes vote.
Trenton Times on Ballot Question 2:
"The second ballot question is very technical, but what it asks is whether the state Legislature should set up the rules for appointing judges to municipal court that cover more than one town.
Currently, the state Constitution spells out how such appointments should be made: The governor nominates the judges and the Senate approves or rejects them.
If this ballot question is approved, the constitutional regulations would be deleted and the appointment of lower-level judges would be done according to statutes set up by the Legislature.
Keep in mind that this change applies only to municipal or central courts that have jurisdiction over more than one town. It does not apply to single-town courts, where the appointment of judges is already covered by state statutes.
It is expected that the Legislature will allow towns that share municipal courts will have the power to make the ju dicial appointments. That is as it should be. It would also encourage towns to consolidate local courts, which would, one hopes, result in savings for taxpayers. "
http://www.nj.com/opinion/times/editorials/index.ssf?/base/news-0/122508031975930.xml&coll=5
Your thoughts Art?
Your thoughts Art?
I think I need to study the questions.
I doubt that the NTU read the entire Senate Concurrent Resolution that authorizes the ballot question and includes all the fine political print. In that print - Seth Grossman points out - there is the Trojan Horse, where the Legislature can grant the full faith and credit of the state to junk bonds, which were not approved by the voters.
Vote "no" to ballot question #1,
Post a Comment