Dina Matos McGreevey's turn

I had no interest in reading former Gov. James McGreevey's tell-all book because I knew it wouldn't provide any insight into New Jersey politics, and I didn't want to hear his lies and his excuses for doing what he did to his wife and family. But I can't wait to read the account from his wife, Dina Matos McGreevey. Hyperion will be publishing her version in a book titled "Silent Partner," set for release in May. The Hyperion Web site previews the book in a blip titled "The truth behind the lies." It reads as follows:

"It was an unforgettable scene. Dina Matos McGreevey, an attractive woman in her mid-thirties, wife, mother, and First Lady of the state of New Jersey, watched silently as her husband, then New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevey, resigned his office with the revelation that he was a "gay American." The picture of grace and loyalty, perfectly composed in her pale blue suit, Dina Matos McGreevey gave no sign of the tangled mixture of fear, sorrow, and anger she felt that day, no hint of the devastation that was to come. Since then she has been asked repeatedly about the nature of her marriage, about what she knew and when she knew it. Since then, she has remained silent. Until now.

"Speaking up at last, Dina Matos McGreevey here recounts the details of her marriage to Jim McGreevey. What emerges is a tale of love and betrayal, of heartbreak and scandal - and ultimately, hope.

"It all began with so much promise. Dina Matos was a responsible and civic-minded young woman who fell in love with the passion of political action. When Jim McGreevey walked into her life, he appeared to be a kind and loving man, someone with whom she could build a life based on shared ideals, a strong spiritual commitment, and a desire to make a difference in the world.

"Beyond their initial chemistry, Dina Matos was attracted by Jim McGreevey's principles and his unwavering devotion to his work. She didn't know that his life, and thus their marriage, were built on a foundation of lies; that his campaign stops were dotted by casual sexual encounters at truck stops and gay clubs; or that, by his own admission, he began an adulterous affair with another man while she was in the hospital awaiting the birth of their child. "Could I have known," she asks? 'How could I have known?'

"With scalding honesty, she tells of her life with the former governor, of the politics and public service that brought them together, and the lies that tore them apart. Here is a story of a marriage that was anything but happily-ever-after, told by a strong and resilient woman who can, and finally will, speak for herself."

NRC: Fighting off terrorism not our job

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission today approved a new plan for defending nuclear plants against terrorist attacks that concluded it's "impractical" for plant operators to try to stop an airborne attack against a nuclear reactor. Impractical?

That's not to say terrorism doesn't pose a major risk to nuclear plants, particularly those with Oyster Creek's dated design. But the NRC says it's not its job to prevent terrorist attacks that use airplanes as a weapon or attacks that use rocket-propelled grenades or other weapons frequently used by terrorists in the Middle East.

The NRC maintains that nuclear plants' defense plans should require what is "reasonable" to be expected of a civilian security force. They define reasonable as being capable of fighting off a small band of terrorists using limited weaponry.

It's totally unreasonable to approve nuclear plant license renewals, and to allow nuclear plants to continue operating, if SOMEONE isn't responsible for guarding against airborne attacks. The good folks fighting license renewal at Oyster Creek, and the state of New Jersey, must continue to press for legislation requiring that nuclear plants be adequately protected from terrorism.

Corzine, Legislature approval ratings head south

A new poll says that two of every three New Jersey residents doubt whether the Legislature will make meaningful property tax cuts this year. That degree of skepticism isn't at all surprising. Nor is Gov. Corzine's declining popularity. His overall approval rating in the Quinnipiac University poll is down from 49 percent last month to 42 percent this month. Only 30 percent approve of the way he is handling the property tax issue.

New Jersey residents are even less satisfied with the Democratic-controlled Legislature. Its overall approval rating is 27 percent, and only 16 percent approve of the way it is handling property taxes.

With every seat in the Legislature up for grabs in November, the Democrats will be cutting their own throats if they don't produce deliver significant tax and ethics reforms this session.

Why not bound and gag the state comptroller?

The attempts to water down the property tax reforms recommended by four legislative committees back in the fall get more nauseating by the day. One of the most offensive is the Senate's attempt to defang the proposed Comptroller's Office by limiting its scope. Gov. Corzine has agreed to the "compromise." The creation of the office, which would have virtually unlimited power to audit all government entities, was one of Corzine's top anti-corruption initiatives.
But the compromise Senate version of the bill, which was held Monday because Senate President Richard Codey couldn't come up with the one additional vote needed for passage, is worse than no bill at all. Among other things, it prohibits the office from reviewing local land deals, including redevelopment agreements, and restricts audits of municipal governments and schools. The only Democrat to oppose the bill, Sen. Barbara Buono of Middlesex County, says recent amendments have emasculated it.
Two questions: Why would a governor and a Senate president truly interested in cracking down on corruption and cozy development deals exempt land deals from independent scrutiny? The answer is depressingly obvious. The other question: Why isn't professed corruption fighter Ellen Karcher, D-Monmouth, getting up on her soapbox on this issue?

Porous tax cap

Gov. Corzine says he wants to impose a 4 percent cap on property taxes, but the usual suspects are doing everything they can to either kill it or add so many exemptions to it to render it virtually meaningless - as it is today. The current caps are actually lower than what Corzine has proposed. Yet property tax rates having been rising by about 7 percent a year.
Tights caps are exactly what this state needs to control spending and taxes. An Associated Press story this weekend, citing a study by Americans for Tax Reform, determined that if New Jersey had implemented the same tax cap as Massachusetts had in 1980 - 2.5 percent - homeowners here would be paying about $4,200 a year in property taxes instead of nearly $6,000.

Cancer deaths hit plateau

When it comes to cancer, any good news is welcome news. The American Cancer Society reported this week that the number of cancer deaths in 2004 fell by 3,000 from 2003 - the second straight year in which deaths fell. Nevertheless, the disease claimed 553,888 lives in 2004.

According to the most recent comparative data, New Jersey had the second highest cancer rate in the nation between 1998 and 2002, behind only Rhode Island. It had the highest incidence of prostate cancer and was tied for first in incidence of colon and rectal cancer among men. It was slightly below national averages for breast cancer and lung cancer in men, and but was above the national norm for lung cancer in women.

Experts are debating whether the reduction of cancer deaths is due more to improvements in treatment or to better health screening and improved diets. I'm inclined to believe most of the improvement is related to lifestyle changes.

Less painful to top the tank

Life is good. Stock prices have been rising and gasoline prices have been falling again.
The average price at the pump for a gallon of regular unleaded in New Jersey is down to $2.12 today, according to newjerseyfuelprices.com. http://www.newjerseygasprices.com/. Prices are as low as $1.94 in south Jersey, and I filled up my tank on Route 33 in Neptune yesterday for $2.03. Next time I need gas, I should be able to find it for less than $2.
Prices have dipped about 12 cents a gallon since Christmas, and they are expected to inch still lower, thanks in large part to the warm winter and the reduced demand for home heating oil. It's conceivable prices could drop to their lowest level in nearly three years before heading back up again.
Gas prices in Jersey, by the way, are about 10 cents below the national average, but there are 19 states where it is cheaper, led by Michigan at $1.98, according to AAA. http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.asp.

Court decision could be setback for Oyster Creek

The decision today by the U.S. Supreme Court not to review a California appellate court ruling requiring federal regulators to assess the environmental impact of a possible terrorist attack on a new storage facility for nuclear waste could have important implications for the Oyster Creek nuclear power plant, which is seeking a 20-year license renewal.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has long maintained that the National Environmental Policy Act does not require the possibility of terrorist attacks to be taken into account before the agency issues licenses or permits. The appeals court in June said the NRC should have considered the environmental consequences of a potential terrorist attack before approving the storage facility. Aware of the implications a Supreme Court ruling could have, the five NRC commissioners in September postponed making a decision on New Jersey's request for a terrorism-impact hearing on Oyster Creek.

The susceptibility of nuclear power plants to terrorism should be part of the licensing, and license renewal, process. The need for such a review is even more imperative at older plants such as Oyster Creek, whose dated design makes them particularly vulnerable.

Illegal immigration taxing NJ taxpayers

If lawmakers are looking for a good way to close the state's projected $2 billion tax deficit, they might want to check out a new study that shows illegal immigrants in New Jersey are costing taxpayers at least $2 billion a year.
According to the Federation for Immigration Reform study, titled "The Costs of Illegal Immigration to New Jerseyites," http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_njcosts, the state spends more than $1.85 billion on education alone to school the children of illegal immigrants, who make up nearly 12 percent of the K-12 population. That estimate does not include the costs for ESL programs, remedial education or breakfast and lunch programs available to students from low-income families.
Health care for illegal immigrants costs taxpayers an additional $200 million a year, and the cost of incarcerating deportable illegal aliens in jails costs another $50 million.
Immigration is generally a federal matter. The report notes, however, that "federal law has provided avenues for the state and local governments to act to lessen the fiscal burden of illegal immigration, but state and local governments in New Jersey are not using those resources."
It's time they start doing so.

Good kids, foolish drivers

The accident that killed three Freehold High school teenagers and a 68-year-old retired school nurse led to record traffic on our app.com Web site, including a record number of posts to our Forums. The Forums discussions brought out the best in people, and, in some cases, the worst. While most of the posters expressed heartfelt sympathy for the victims and their families, much of the discussion centered around the issue of blame. Was the teen driver to blame for driving too fast? If he was driving too fast, was he acting any differently than many, if not most, young drivers? Were the parents of the driver to blame for giving him a high-octane car? Were the police and school officials to blame for not cracking down on students violating the rules of provisional licenses?
Here's my take: Dealing with the issue of teens and safety behind the wheel is a shared responsibility. Parents, schools officials and the police must do everything within their power to drive home the point that speed kills. But in all too many cases, that won't be enough to change behaviors. It wasn't when I was young. I was a good kid. But, like most kids, I was a fool when I got behind the wheel. The same thing that happened to the three Freehold High School kids could easily have happened to me.
There is no simple solution to the problem. But the most appropriate response would be a tightening of the provisional license rules, and strict enforcement of them by police, working in conjunction with parent groups and school officials.

Alternative minimum tax and NJ: perfect together

Democratic leaders in Congress say that fixing the alternative minimum tax will be a priority this year - welcome news in light of the latest depressing tax news for New Jersey residents. The state ranks first in the number of federal income tax returns subject to the costly AMT.

The AMT was originally created to prevent the super-rich from exploiting tax loopholes to avoid paying the Internal Revenue Service their fair share - if anything at all. But because of rising incomes, and the lack of an inflation adjuster in the AMT legislation, more than 30 million people, including millions of middle-class families, are expected to be subject to the costly AMT by 2010 - nearly 20 percent of all filers.

In 2004, the latest year for which figures are available, 5.5 percent of New Jersey taxpayers were subject to the AMT. Among the nation's counties, Monmouth ranked 12th (8.2 percent of all filers). The average additional tax liability under the AMT in Monmouth was $3,805.

If you don't understand the AMT, or whether you could end up being snared in its web if you haven't been already, here's a primer: http://www.fairmark.com/amt/amt101.htm.
And here's a link to the Tax Foundation report: http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/2131.html

No relief from unions' arrogance

For those of you who held out even a glimmer of hope that Gov. Corzine's State of the State address might have a positive effect on the way the state employee unions would approach negotiations, or improve their understanding of the central role public employee benefits and salaries play in the long-term fiscal health of the state, here's a reality-check reaction to the speech from Carla Katz, Corzine's former gal pal and president of the Communications Workers of American Local 1034.
"We believe he showed he's committed to the collective bargaining process. We don't believe there is any real connection between changes that will be made at the bargaining table and property tax relief,'' Katz said.
How's that for arrogance? This is what we are dealing with folks.

What about the other unions, guv?

I was delighted to see that four public sector management organizations sent a letter to Gov. Corzine yesterday challenging his opposition to cost-cutting, legislative changes to public employee health benefits - and his rationale for it.

Corzine has said he thinks any changes in employee benefits should be negotiated rather than legislated. He is now negotiating new contracts with the state's major employee unions.

The joint statement from the state School Boards Association, League of Municipalities, Council of County Colleges and Association of Counties underscored the inanity of Corzine's stance:

"Under current law this approach (negotiating changes) would help state government, but there is a fundamental flaw ... when it is applied to health benefits provided by local government employers," the letter said. "Unlike the state government, municipalities, counties, school boards and county colleges that participate in the State Health Benefits Program are prohibited from bringing health benefit issues to the collective bargaining table."

That's right, those benefits CAN'T BE negotiated. Any changes to the program MUST BE DONE legislatively. It's scary that the governor is refusing to act on a bill that would help save New Jersey taxpayers tens of millions of dollars on such a flimsy pretext.

Another low-cal academic study

Reading about dieting and weight loss may be harmful, a new University of Minnesota study of teenage girls has concluded.
OK, now what? How are the people who take the findings seriously - something that closer reading of the study suggests might not be a real good idea - supposed to react to them? What possible value is there in this study?
It found that middle school girls who frequently read dieting articles in magazines were twice as likely five years later to try extreme weight loss measures such as vomiting, fasting, smoking cigarettes or using laxatives.
According to one of the study's authors, Patricia van den Berg, the findings suggest parents should carefully consider whether they want their daughters reading about weight loss.
"It possibly would be helpful to teen girls if their mothers didn't have these types of magazines around," she said.
If the researchers used any public money to fund this study, taxpayers should get a refund.