NJ GOP legislators who screwed Trump this week

Should legislators be required to disclose tax returns?

A lot of Democrat legislators appear to think so. . . then again, maybe not.  They believe that Presidential candidates should or at least a certain Presidential candidate who is now the incumbent President.  Fair enough.  This is the New Jersey Democrats' version of what some southern Republicans got up to after Barack Obama was elected President.  Their tool was to mandate production of birth certificates.  The Jersey Democrats want tax returns.

It seems America now does that third world country thing of de-legitimizing the winner of every national election.  We now place faction or party ahead of country.  Hopefully we don't go the whole hog and start the violent coup thing any time soon, but there are an awful lot of idiots out there on both sides.

Assembly Republican Leader Jon Bramnick raised the question of having legislators and gubernatorial candidates disclose their tax returns at Thursday's Assembly session.  It is good to see some Republicans calling the Democrats out.  Unfortunately, there are others who would rather back the Democrats up .

Yes, it is time for the first installment of Jersey Conservative's weekly corrective to the ridiculous "screw card" scores shat out by the crew over at AFP (Anarchists for Petroleum. . . subsidized petroleum, that is).  We didn't want to go down this road, but the sheer ignorance and blissful trashing of the state's most consistently pro-business/ pro-tax cut legislators left us no choice.  We have been forced to apply balance.

On Monday, the Senate voted for S-3048, which is legislation designed to screw over and embarrass Republican President Donald Trump.  The bill "requires candidates for President and Vice-President of United States to disclose federal income tax returns" in order to be allowed to appear on a ballot in New Jersey, and it "prohibits (the) Electoral College electors from voting for candidates who fail to file income tax returns." 

Yep, that is a middle finger to President Donald Trump.  Look, we all get why the Democrats are doing this -- they are in deep denial and are allowing tribe to come before country (they wouldn't be in this mess if they had let Bernie win, but that is a story for another time) -- but why would a Republican join in? 

Here's what you need to know about the anti-Trump Koch organization that runs AFP.  One of their heroes is Republican Senator Jennifer Beck.  She got a good mark on the "screw card," and she also voted to screw President Donald Trump on S-3048.  Two other AFP "heroes" who also happen to be GOP Senators joined in on the screwing too.

Shouldn't Senator Beck and her colleagues be required to release their tax returns too?  This is all they have to release at present:

In their effort to embarrass and demean President Trump, AFP "hero" Beck also took a shitty vote that instructs state officials not to cooperate with federal officials on matters of national security and terrorism.  S-3011, "directs State and local governments to refrain from disclosing to the federal government personally identifiable information, regarding the religious beliefs, practices, or affiliation, or national origin or ethnicity, of any individual, which the federal government requests for compiling a list, registry, or database of individuals based on religious affiliation, national origin, or ethnicity... The bill further prohibits the use of money, facilities, property, equipment, or personnel by State and local law enforcement authorities to investigate or enforce any criminal, civil, or administrative violation, or warrant for a violation, of a requirement that individuals register with the federal government or any federal agency based on religion, national origin, or ethnicity."

Apparently the Senator and her colleagues who voted for this (thankfully, she was joined by just one other Republican, also an AFP "hero") have never heard of a religious group called the Peoples Temple of the Disciples of Christ.  It was founded in 1955 by the Reverend Jim Jones.  According to Wikipedia, the group preached a religious message that mixed "Christianity with socialist politics, with an emphasis on racial equality." For a time, it was headquartered in San Francisco and boasted more than 20,000 communicants.  Later, the group moved to Guyana to establish a commune.  In 1978, the group murdered five people -- including a United States congressman and three journalists -- and forced or induced 918 people to consume poison or otherwise take their own lives.  276 children were murdered as a direct result of the "practices and beliefs" of this religious affiliation.  It was "the greatest single loss of American civilian life in a deliberate act" until September 11, 2001.

Another bad, bad vote this week by AFP "hero" Senator Beck was intended as a slap in the face to efforts by President Trump to make good on his campaign promises regarding illegal immigration.  You won't believe the language in SCR-134:  "As amended, this concurrent resolution expresses the Legislature’s intent that school districts and public institutions of higher education continue to serve as safe zones and resource centers for students and families threatened by immigration or discrimination; and that school districts and public institutions of higher education continue to protect the data and identities of undocumented students, family members, and school employees who may be adversely affected by future federal policies or executive action that results in the collection of personally identifiable information.  Since the conclusion of the 2016 presidential election, school districts, public institutions of higher education, and the students and families they serve have raised increased concerns about the possibility of impending action by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that may impact undocumented students and their families.  As a result of this heightened concern, school districts and institutions of higher education across the country have adopted resolutions and policies reaffirming their intent to continue to act as safe zones and resource centers for students and families threatened by immigration or discrimination and to protect the identities of and data related to undocumented students and their families."

AFP "hero" Senator Jennifer Beck, was the only Republican to vote for this howler.  There are many important votes.  Illegal immigration matters.  Terrorism matters.  Defending America matters.  Don't let the Trump-haters at the Kock organization tell you that only the gas tax matters

Senator Beck and her collaborator at AFP push their pro-illegals, anti-Trump, social liberal agenda.

This ends the first installment of Jersey Conservative's corrective to the AFP "screw card."  Stay tuned. . . 

Sen. Beck: Tax policy is black or white/ gender is not

Jennifer Beck is a moralizer.  If you disagree with her on something as banal as tax policy, it makes you a bad person -- and that extends to your family too -- you are all somehow less than human. 

But on issues such as whether a woman or her daughter can object to an anatomical male showering with them, or sharing their changing or toilet facilities, Beck insists on acceptance.  You see, for Beck, gender is loosey goosey.

But not tax policy -- something on which normal, rational people can have different positions and take different approaches.  On tax policy, Jennifer Beck becomes emotional. You are either with her -- or you are pond scum.  She'll get a colleague to accuse you of criminal activity if you disagree with her, or a group like AFP to run a campaign attacking your child, or a talk radio host like NJ 101.5's Bill Spadea to spread false information against you.

And what that means, if you are on the wrong side of Senator Beck, what that means is that you'll get compared to a dead bloody pig or that your legislative staff will get phone calls telling them to "burn to death in a car crash."  Irrational emotion can have its consequences, just ask former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords.

Ah, the joys of talk radio.  We're not so sure that Jennifer Beck's district is the talk radio crowd, not so sure they're down with the Koch Brothers' AFP.  She'll have to shed these friends before changing into a costume more suitable for home.  But talk radio... if it was in 1968 what it is today, we would probably have seen the election of George Corley Wallace as President of the United States.

Here is a question for Senator Jennifer Beck and her allies to answer -- in between their ranting and raging on talk radio:  If New Jersey has the most expensive roads, then why have we paid the least for them -- for decades?

New Jersey is the most densely populated state in America.  Nowhere else are so many people so packed together.  More people = more wear on the roads = more maintenance and repair.

On top of that, we're sandwiched in between New York City and Washington, DC, with Philadelphia and Baltimore thrown in for good measure.  All that traffic back and forth on the northeast corridor. 

And yet, for decades, we have been getting by on 14.5 cents a gallon, while states like Pennsylvania need to charge drivers a tax of more than 50 cents a gallon on gasoline (over 65 cents a gallon on diesel). 

New Jersey has a population density of 1,196 people per square mile.  Why does Pennsylvania, with a population density of just 284 people per square mile, need to charge over three times what we do to fund their roads?  And Pennsylvania has 4 million more people than we do.  That translates into a lot more in-state drivers to tax. 

So how come we pay so little to fund the roads... despite those lurid claims on talk radio that we pay the most?

The answer is simple.  Debt is Trenton's crack cocaine.

Our politicians are credit card junkies.  Trenton has been able to get by on charging drivers just 14.5 cents a gallon tax because Trenton has been borrowing the rest in return for votes.

Cheap gas for cheap votes... don't worry, somebody else will pay... like your kids, or maybe, your grandkids.

In Pennsylvania, they pay their way.

In New Jersey, they put their children into debt.

Senator Beck should drop support for trans-men in girls' toilets bill

If we are to avoid another performance like 2015, the Republican legislative caucuses of both chambers should use 2016 to prepare for 2017.  The most important thing is to do yourself no harm. 

We've detailed before how bills like S-283 have no base of support and how they could do enormous damage -- not only to the prospect of turning out our base -- but with any voters who believe in privacy between the sexes and with protecting vulnerable women and girls.  Polling shows large majorities in favor of traditional privacy no matter how the question is posed. 

Such a poll was recently conducted in the Eleventh Legislative District in Monmouth County.  More on that later.

Suffice it to say that modesty might draw barbed mockery from some, but in a district in which 48 percent of all registered Republicans are aged 60 or over and 66 percent of Republican super voters (3 of 4 or above) are aged 60 or over, it is a safe bet that it still counts for something.  And we can't wait to find out.

When educated as to the number of convicted male sex offenders who could use a law like S-283 to gain access to girls and women for their self-gratification, the response is off-the-charts.  Republicans, Democrats, Independents -- it doesn't matter.  Many in the LGBT community break ranks with their lobbyist class and oppose S-283 on the grounds that it leaves too many people vulnerable to sexual abuse, rape, and even murder.

We understand from a highly placed source in the Legislature that S-283 will be making an appearance again.  This source also confirmed that S-283 will have GOP support. Prominent among those GOP supporters is Senator Jennifer Beck, a co-sponsor of S-283.

We didn't expect such a betrayal of the Republican base in an election cycle as rebellious as 2016-17 is turning out to be.  Of course, Senator Beck is making a lot of noise on other issues in an attempt to get conservative voters to forget who she really is, and her decades-long record as a lobbyist and legislator devoted to the liberal causes dear to the heart of the political and corporate establishment.     

If passed into law, Beck's legislation allows a man, with a penis, to become a legal "woman", simply by saying that he is seeing a therapist and then re-submitting his birth certificate to reflect his "new sex".  No surgery required. 

And it won't be recorded as an "amended" birth certificate.  It will be filed as the original.  The government will pretend that it can go back in time to correct the "perception" of the doctors and nurses who saw a child with a penis and checked "male".  The government will, in fact, lie and pretend that the attending physician checked "female" when, of course, he did not.    

What S-283 will do is endanger the lives of women and girls in New Jersey.  And come election time every legislator who supports S-283, regardless of their party, is going to have to answer some tough questions from average constituents about why you had to do this and not something important, like lowering property taxes, ending the tax on retirement income, or fixing the Transportation Trust Fund. 

Watch the video below and see if you are ready to answer those questions:

Poll: Sen. Beck is "out-of-touch"

Yesterday evening, on the grassy verge of some sad-assed gas station in Freehold, Senator Jennifer Beck rallied the remnants of the Monmouth County Tea Party movement to wave signs (paid for courtesy of the petroleum industry) and cheer on this lobbyist turned politician.  Dozens of tea partiers attended, but hundreds more were missing.   Why? Because they've moved -- just like conservative Senator Steve Oroho warned they would, unless something was done to keep them in New Jersey.

Senator Oroho's plan:  An average $1,200 tax cut for every retiree in New Jersey.

Senator Beck's plan:  Screw those retirees and let's keep paying for out-of-state drivers to have a free ride.

So that accounts for the smaller-than-in-the-past numbers at Beck's rally last night.  Many of the tea partiers who would have been there simply don't live here anymore. They've moved to states like Florida, North Carolina, and Delaware -- just like Senator Oroho warned they would.

Of course, the cause and the people are only a convenient backdrop for the kick-off of Senator Beck's 2017 re-election campaign.  After losing both her running mates to the Democrats last year, Beck is running scared.  She thinks the "anti-gas tax" slogan is a winner -- and that's partly the fault of the leader of her caucus, Senator Tom Kean Jr. 

It was Kean who fed his caucus polling numbers that bear no resemblance to the context in which these issues will be presented in an actual election -- by people with many times the resources Senator Kean and the NJGOP will be able to muster.  In short, the Gag will be upon them and then it will be too late.

But Beck really believes it.  She's bought into the idea that the Democrats (or her primary opponent) will frame the issue as it was framed to her.  Here's what she told NJTV reporter David Cruz at last night's "rally" in Freehold:

"This rally is about making it clear that the people of the state of New Jersey are opposed to a billion dollar, 23-cent gas tax increase. In case anyone wasn’t sure, you should know today that they are absolutely opposed and that you’re really out of touch if you think people are OK with that."

So this is the Gag...

Earlier this month, a poll was conducted in Monmouth County by a well-known, nationally-recognized survey research firm.  Now Monmouth County is far more Republican than is Legislative District 11 -- Senator Beck's district.  So one would think that the county as a whole would be more anti-gas tax than her Democrat-leaning district.  And that turned out to be true, because the pollster broke the county data down by legislative district.

We're releasing some of the county data but not the district data.  That's because we would like to be instructive but not prejudicial.  So here's how the data looks, when you place it in a campaign context:

T10. Thinking now about New Jersey’s Transportation Trust Fund, and different proposals to fund the maintenance and repair of roads and bridges. One proposal would borrow 4.4 billion dollars and freeze education funding for seven years, and would avoid having to raise the state gas tax. Knowing this information, do you support or oppose this proposal?

Total Support .......................................................... 41%

Total Oppose .......................................................... 47%

Strongly Support ...................................................... 19%

Somewhat Support .................................................. 22%

Strongly Oppose ..................................................... 35%

Somewhat Oppose .................................................. 12%

Unsure, No Opinion ............................................... 12%

T11. The Transportation Trust Fund is funded by the state gas tax, and is nearly out of money. When it runs out of money, county and local governments will have to raise property taxes to pay for road and bridge maintenance repairs. Knowing this information, which of the following do you think is the best option to pay for repairs to roads and bridges?  An increase in the state gas tax or an increase in property taxes?

Gas tax .................................................................... 73%

Property tax ............................................................... 6%

Unsure or No Opinion ............................................ 21%

T12. Approximately one third of gas tax revenues in New Jersey is paid by out-of-state travelers, while 100% of property taxes are paid by New Jersey residents. Knowing this information, which of the following do you think is the best option to pay for improvements to roads and bridges, and increase in the state gas tax or an increase in property taxes?

Gas tax .................................................................... 81%

Property tax ............................................................... 3%

Unsure or No Opinion ............................................ 16%

T13. As you may know, New Jersey is at risk of losing 1.6 billion dollars in federal funds for road repairs and maintenance, which would lead to an increase in property taxes. Knowing this, would you support or oppose a proposal to increase the state gas tax to minimize the increase in property taxes? 

Total Support .......................................................... 77%

Total Oppose .......................................................... 16%

Strongly Support ...................................................... 58%

Somewhat Support .................................................. 19%

Strongly Oppose ..................................................... 13%

Somewhat Oppose .................................................... 3%

Unsure, No Opinion ................................................. 7%

T14. Would you support or oppose a proposal that would increase the state gas tax and eliminate other taxes, like the state tax on retirement income? 

Total Support .......................................................... 69%

Total Oppose .......................................................... 18%

Strongly Support ...................................................... 48%

Somewhat Support .................................................. 21%

Strongly Oppose ..................................................... 13%

Somewhat Oppose .................................................... 5%

Unsure, No Opinion ............................................... 13%

T15. A proposed increase in the state gas tax would cost the average driver an extra 200 dollars each year. Eliminating the state tax on retirement income would save the average retiree more than twelve hundred dollars each year. Knowing this information, would you support or oppose a proposal that would increase the state gas tax and eliminate the state tax on retirement income at the same time?

Total Support .......................................................... 74%

Total Oppose .......................................................... 14%

Strongly Support ...................................................... 58%

Somewhat Support .................................................. 16%

Strongly Oppose ..................................................... 12%

Somewhat Oppose .................................................... 2%

Unsure, No Opinion ............................................... 12%

Does the Gagging ever end?  No, it never ends.  It just goes on and on...