A challenge to AFP

Yesterday, AFP circulated an arrogant missive filled with lies about Senator Steve Oroho, one of the most consistently conservative legislators in New Jersey.  You know the Steve Oroho we're talking about  -- the guy who started attending Right to Life marches when he was a teen.  Oh, that's right, AFP doesn't support the Right to Life, we forgot.  On the Second Amendment, Steve Oroho rates an A+ for his leadership -- but that wouldn't impress AFP, because they couldn't care less about the Second Amendment. 

The people who fund AFP aren't much on Religious Freedom or traditional values, but they wouldn't mind legalizing prostitution and narcotics.  The thing they are really passionate about it not raising taxes on petroleum products -- like gasoline.  And that's because they make their billions in the petroleum industry.

The email was circulated by AFP's field director, a young man who doesn't need to worry about property taxes, because his mom and dad do.  There's nothing wrong with being young, but should he really be the one lecturing us on life choices?    

Steve Oroho has spent his life trying to squeeze the most out of a dollar.  As a young CPA, he worked for W. R. Grace when the leadership of that company was charged by President Ronald Reagan to find ways to cut spending and make the federal government run more efficiently.  Steve honed those skills as a senior financial officer of an S&P 500 company, as the Sussex County Freeholder who saved money and reformed the budget process, and as the conservative leader on the Senate Budget Committee.

The state is faced with a very difficult choice on how to fund roads and bridge repair -- raise property taxes or raise the gas tax.  Approximately one-third of gas tax revenues in New Jersey come from out-of-state drivers.  All property taxes come from the people of New Jersey.  So which do you think is the best way to pay for improvements to roads and bridges, an increase in the gas tax or an increase in property taxes?

Steve Oroho has worked very hard to fashion a plan so that raising property taxes will not be necessary to fund road and bridge repairs.  Instead, a modest increase in the gas tax to fund the TTF would be balanced with several tax cuts.  These would include the elimination of the tax on retirement income and a phase-out of the estate tax. 

So who at AFP instructed their young field director to tell us that a property tax increase is preferable to a gas tax increase, that the end of the tax on retirement income isn't worth fighting for, and ditto for the phase out of the estate tax?

How does AFP decide on which issues to fight for and  which to ignore?  Who decided that the tax on retirement income should remain and that property taxes should fund roads and bridges instead of a tax on petroleum products, and at what level was the decision made?

The paid staff at AFP have titles like "field director" and "executive director", but excuse us -- did anyone vote for you?  Did anyone elect your state chair or your leadership? Steve Oroho is a Senator because he won a contested election in 2007 and then three more elections after that.  Steve Oroho won an election in which every member of the Republican establishment in Trenton supported his opponent.  And this wasn't his first victory as an underdog, in 2004 he defeated an incumbent Freeholder Director who had the support of her county party.  What elections have you won?

AFP's executive director loves to brag that the group has over 100,000 "members."  Okay then -- do those members get a vote?  Are they really members or just consumers?  You know, consumers of the bullshit AFP dishes out to them when its real "members" -- its billionaire shareholders -- decide to turn it on to lobby to prevent at all costs a tax on one of their petroleum products?

We're just asking.  Now AFP can prove that their "members" are really members.  All it takes is a vote.  Here in America, we're big on votes.  So here's the challenge to AFP. Send a private mailing to each of your members and ask them to mark on a secret ballot which of these taxes they would most like to see eliminated:

-- the gas tax

-- the property tax

-- the tax on retirement income

-- the estate tax

Then, with the consent of your "members" and guided by their will, they can direct that young field director as to which issues to push and which to ignore.

AFP boss says Clinton would make better President than Trump.

AFP is trying to confuse property taxpayers

Like the Reason Foundation, Americans for Prosperity (AFP) was founded by the owners of Koch Industries, a $115 billion global corporation that operates in 59 countries around the world.  Its core business is petroleum and it zealously protects that business, as one would expect it to.

AFP likes to portray itself as a "membership" organization, but unlike other membership organizations here in America, AFP's members don't get to vote on who leads its national and state organizations.  Those decisions are made for them by individuals closely connected with the owners of Koch Industries.   That means that AFP is essentially a lobby group, so we perfectly understand why it would rather see property taxes increased on every homeowner in New Jersey instead of a petroleum tax increase on products produced by Koch Industries.

Today, AFP sent out a very emotional press release about the $341 million boondoggle to repair Route 35.  We all agree that construction projects are targets for political corruption, inefficiencies, and over-regulation in New Jersey.  But we also know -- as AFP does -- that raising these issues does not solve the problem of how to fund road and bridge maintenance and repairs now that the Transportation Trust Fund (TTF) is out of money.

Unlike many liberals, conservatives do not respond to mere emotional appeals like AFP's press release today.  We prefer to listen to a rational argument that appeals to our intellect. 

Yes, something needs to be done to address the political corruption, inefficiencies, and over-regulation of construction projects in New Jersey.  As a start, AFP might join with those of us who are trying to undo the gubernatorial order that killed the state's "fast-track" regulatory program that would speed up construction and save taxpayers' millions each year.  Now where is AFP on this cost-saving reform?  We would like to know.

For two years now a solar construction scandal has rocked northwest New Jersey (where AFP is based and where the group's leadership lives) with all the political corruption and boondoggle AFP could ask for -- but not a peep about it has come from AFP.  It is as if they were asleep, or perhaps the leaders of AFP don't read their local newspapers?  Of course, this construction project doesn't concern a product near and dear to the hearts of Koch Industries. 

Instead of making specific suggestions on how we can address the political corruption, inefficiencies, and over-regulation of construction projects in New Jersey, AFP has only one suggestion -- DON'T RAISE TAXES ON PETROLEUM PRODUCTS!  Now why would that be?

Here's what AFP isn't telling you.

The Transportation Trust Fund (TTF) collects money from the gas tax and then uses that money to maintain and repair state roads and bridges.  The TTF also sends money to local governments (counties and municipalities) so that they can afford to maintain and repair the roads and bridges that they own. 

The TTF is nearly bankrupt.  There will be no money for the maintenance and repair of the roads and bridges owned by the state AND there will be no money to send to local governments to maintain and repair their roads and bridges.

It's happening already.

Last month the town of Montville, in Morris County, went to the TTF for funding to repair a road.  It was turned down.  Note the shock of township leaders:

Due to the New Jersey Transportation Fund’s unfunded state, Canning said he saw something he had never seen in 25 years of working in government: a grant denial.

“There were 641 applications to the NJ Department of Transportation requesting more than $253 million of the $78.75 million available in municipal aide grant funds,” said Canning, “and they did not approve our Brittany Road project, therefore, all $650,000 will have to be self-funded.”

What that "will have to be self-funded" means is that the property taxpayers of Montville will be stuck paying for those repairs.   

As more and more local governments get turned down, their leaders will have a decision to make:  Either they raise property taxes on every homeowner and business to pay for the maintenance and repair of roads and bridges; or they allow those roads and bridges to fall into disrepair, and become unsafe. 

If local governments take the second option and allow roads and bridges to become unsafe, they will be left with just two choices:  Close those roads and bridges as they become unsafe, or accept that there will be lawsuits for negligence when people are injured or killed on those unsafe roads and bridges.  Of course, the legal bills and settlements for such lawsuits will also result in the need to raise property taxes -- so the taxpayer will lose either way.

Don't think it will happen?  Well, it already has. 

It took 145 victims, 22 children, 13 deaths, and one bridge collapse for the Legislature in Minnesota to finally raise the gas tax to fund road and bridge maintenance and repairs.  Of course, at that point they also had to pay out many millions more in hospital care, rehabilitation, on-going health care, and negligence settlements -- as well as totally reconstructing a bridge.

Do we really want to wait until we are burying children?

In the real world, we all know that when the money runs out, and the workers don't get paid, the repairs will stop. 

And then there's this to consider:  Right now, New Jersey taxpayers subsidize out-of-state drivers who use our roads.  If we do nothing, we will end up paying $11 billion over the next 25 years to subsidize out-of-state drivers.

Approximately one-third of gas tax revenues in New Jersey come from out-of-state drivers.  All property taxes come from the people of New Jersey.  So which do you think is the best way to pay for improvements to roads and bridges, an increase in the gas tax or an increase in property taxes?

Let us know how you feel.  Your thoughts and ideas are always welcome.

Are social conservatives being duped by AFP?

On Monday, the state director of Americans for Prosperity (AFP) put out a letter outlining the economic problems in New Jersey and opposing any new tax on petroleum products.  Of course, AFP is run by David H. Koch, a New York City billionaire ($43.3 billion and counting) who is an owner at Koch Industries and whose core business is the refining and distribution of petroleum. 

The letter was signed by six organizations whose principal mission is the advancement of traditional values and conservative social and cultural ideals.  They backed-up AFP, but would AFP ever back up them?  That's not likely, because the Chairman of AFP -- yes, the same David H. Koch -- is a social liberal.  But don't take our word for it.  Here is what Wikipedia had to say about him:

(David) Koch considers himself a social liberal,[22] supporting women's right to choose,[23] gay rights, same-sex marriage and stem-cell research.[3][24] He opposes the war on drugs.

Ditto for Frayda Levin, the co-founder of AFP's New Jersey chapter.  AFP has been AWOL on every issue from same-sex marriage to illegal immigration. 

Ronald Reagan was a social as well as an economic conservative.  He believed in an America built on Judeo-Christian values and the Western tradition of free speech and free markets.  David Koch is no Reaganite.  In fact, he opposed Ronald Reagan in 1980 -- as the Libertarian Party's candidate for Vice President -- running on a platform  that included the following planks:

"We therefore call for the elimination of all restriction on immigration, the abolition of the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the Border Patrol, and a declaration of full amnesty for those people who have entered the country illegally."

" We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children. We further support the repeal of all laws restricting voluntary birth control or the right of the woman to make a personal moral choice regarding the termination of pregnancy."

"We defend the rights of individuals to engage in (or abstain from) any religious activities which do not violate the rights of others. In order to defend religious freedom, we advocate a strict separation of church and state."

"The repeal of all laws regarding consensual sexual relations, including prostitution and solicitation, and the cessation of state oppression and harassment of homosexual men and women, that they, at least, be accorded their full rights as individuals" 

"We believe that 'children' are human beings and, as such, have the same rights as any other human beings. Any reference in the Platform to the rights of human beings includes children."

"The repeal of all laws prohibiting the production, sale, possession, or use of drugs, and of all medical prescription requirements for the purchase of vitamins, drugs and similar substances".

"The repeal of all laws interfering with the right to commit suicide as infringements of the ultimate right of an individual to his or her own life".

"We support recognition of the right to political secession. Exercise of this right, like the exercise of all other rights, does not remove legal and moral obligations not to violate the rights of others."

"We call for the withdrawal of all American troops from bases abroad. In particular, we call for the removal of the U.S. Air Force as well as ground troupes from the Korean peninsula."

"We favor immediate independence for all colonial dependencies, such as Samoa, Guam, Micronesia, the Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico".

"Government interference in transportation is characterized by monopolistic restriction, corruption, and gross inefficiency. We therefore call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation, the Interstate Commerce Commission, the Civil Aeronautics Board, the Federal Maritime Commission, Conrail and Amtrak. We demand the return of America's railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system."

And that, as they say, is how David H. Koch rolls...

AFP's letter takes a stab at the nagging problem of finding the money to keep our roads drivable and our bridges from falling down on our children's heads. Mainly it tells us what not to do -- don't increase the retail cost of a product that billionaire Koch makes money off of.  It doesn't give us a pathway forward.

A couple weeks ago, AFP released its own version of the state budget for 2017.  It reminded us of an earlier budget, written by the same expert, back in 2011. The current document is less explicit, but you can see where things are heading quite clearly in the earlier one.  Under the section "Department of Transportation", there is a discussion about how road projects should be prioritized.  There we find this gem:

"Projects with the least cost and greatest benefit to the state should be chosen first, there by encouraging local governments to commit greater resources in order to 'tilt' the cost-benefit ratio towards their projects.  AFP believes this method of incentivizing local participation will not only help bridge the funding gap but more importantly provide a model for moving forward with more efficient utilization of taxpayer funds for future projects."

That word -- "resources"-- scares us.  Isn't that bureaucrat-speak for "tax money"? 

So let's see.  Local governments (municipal and county) get their "resources" from property tax revenue.  AFP is advocating that local governments increase the "resources" they pledge towards a road project, thereby decreasing the cost to the state.  But not to the people who pay property taxes.  Their cost will go up because property taxes will go up.

Really?  Is this how we are going to "bridge the funding gap"?  With higher property taxes?  The highest in America... still going higher?  Really?  Think again.