Joe Sinagra A Better New Jersey

College says 'You're Fired!' Illegals Lose Campus jobs

2012-02-04T08:46:00.000-05:00

California’s minimum wage went up in January, boosting the salaries of many.

As I have said and written in the past, is that when salaries increase the jobs for the uneducated become less. That’s what appears to be happening here. You have those who came here illegally working at minimum wage at jobs that paid low wages, but those jobs that no one would work, now pay substantially better.

After giving many illegal’s the opportunity to come to the US on a work or guest visa, millions decided to stay beyond the expiration date (millions more just plain ignored the legal process altogether) because the minimum was much better here than wages back home. After working for a few years they realized how much better it was here and now started complaining they weren’t making enough money to live, how they couldn’t survive on minimum wage.

It was never meant for survival but only as a means for a little extra pocket change for the extras. There are those who shout there should be a livable wage. But at $17 an hour those jobs seem more lucrative to those who didn’t want them before, and with thousands on unemployment that job is now very appealing. I’m sure at this campus alone there are thousands of students who would like to earn some money towards paying their expenses.

How many illegal’s breach existing laws, work in service industries serving and preparing food, and by bypassing the system, are hired never having had a medical exam?

For the last two years, many of the dining hall workers had been organizing to form a union, Unions like to use the term “buy American.” Then why solicit membership from non-citizens?

The article states one worker paid for her education over the years. I would think that as an employee of the campus she was getting a free education, not because she could afford to go on the $8 an hour she was getting, but in all that time she never considered getting her citizenship? How many legal citizens are not accepted because they have to compete against the fulfillment of those courses by illegals?

Government never had the manpower to follow up on immigration policies even when they were first enacted. The Federal Government ignored existing immigration laws for years, allowing this to spread beyond the scope of enforcement. Now, due to the ineptness of our government our congressional officials like to say the system is broken. The only thing broken was letting this happen on their watch and to cover up they try and push the ‘Dream Act’ on the American public in the form of Amnesty. The problem is ‘amnesty“ still does not solve the problem of the illegal crossing our borders.

Immigrant Worker Firings Unsettle a College Campus

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/us/after-workers-are-fired-an-immigration-debate-roils-california-campus.html?_r=1&hpw

Obamanomics Vision of Economic Prosperity

2012-01-24T08:59:00.002-05:00

President Barack Obama is expected to lay out his vision for economic prosperity while focusing on equality of opportunity and a return to American values in his State of the Union address.

The U.S. has lost 2.2 million jobs since President Barack Obama took office.

The economy has remained weak. Unemployment is still high, consumer confidence is still low and banks are still hesitant to lend.

Of the 120,000 new jobs created in January 2012, 50,000 were in the retail sector. Most of them minimum-wage positions, many of them temporary holiday hires. The "leisure and hospitality" sector, which includes jobs in the food service industry, accounted for 22,000 of that total. Low paying jobs have replaced the higher paying ones at a much faster pace, many paying even less than they used to. Low-wage occupations saw job growth of 3.2 percent from the beginning of 2010 to the beginning of 2011, while mid-wage jobs only grew by 1.2 percent.

The number of research workers for U.S.-based multinationals working overseas has more than doubled. The number of high-tech manufacturing jobs in the United States has declined by 687,000.

The Obama Administration wasted billions of taxpayer dollars without helping the vast majority of struggling homeowners through a government program that was supposed to help them, but only leaving them in a bigger financial hole.

The rest of us are taxed into nothingness, while $18 trillion dollars are stashed in offshore banks by the global elite, with the U.S. government missing out on $100 billion a year because of offshore banks.

If his future vision of economic prosperity is any indication of his past vision we are all in for a heap of trouble.

Happy 2012!

2012-01-02T10:41:00.000-05:00

New Years is a time to celebrate, to put the past behind you and look forward to a New Year, but there are those who for one reason or another have cause to celebrate.

May we live in a world with the awareness of God's love that helps them find peace.

May the tears be left behind, and bring a New Year of cheer.

May you find the time to do something for someone.

May you remember to say "I love you" at least once a day to your loved ones.

May you find time to find a little humor in our lives and make someone smile who may not have a reason to smile.

May the New Year be one of Hope, Faith, and Love.

May you be blessed with things that matter most if life -the gift of good health, happy home and peace of mind throughout the coming year.

One more year to love, laugh and give.

Happy New Year to all.

Democrat Corruption List

2011-12-26T12:16:00.003-05:00

Corruption . . . I’m sure there is enough to go around, but hey if the liberal Newspapers can have one sided slanted editorials, what the heck this is my page.

Congressional Democrats swept into power in 2006 after a steady drumbeat of attacks against Republicans for allowing a systemic “culture of corruption” to define their majority. It seems times have changed . . . for the worse.

Raymond Lederer (Democrat) U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania. Implicated in the Abscam sting – convicted of bribery and sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000.

Harrison Arlington Williams, Jr. (Democrat) U.S. Senator from New Jersey. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Allegedly accepted an 18% interest in a titanium mine. Convicted of nine counts of bribery, conspiracy, receiving an unlawful gratuity, conflict of interest, and interstate travel in aid of racketeering. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $50,000.

Cornelius Edward Gallagher (Democrat) U.S. Representative New Jersey; Indicted on federal charges of income tax evasion, conspiracy, and perjury.

Frank Thompson, Jr. (Democrat) U.S. Representative from New Jersey. Implicated in the Abscam sting, convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges. Sentenced to three years in prison.

Michael Joseph Myers (Democrat) U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania. Implicated in the Abscam sting – convicted of bribery and conspiracy; sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000; expelled from the House of Representatives.

John Michael Murphy (Democrat) U.S. Representative from New York. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted of conspiracy, conflict of interest, and accepting an illegal gratuity. Sentenced to three years in prison and fined $20,000.

John Wilson Jenrette, Jr (Democrat) U.S. Representative from South Carolina. Implicated in the Abscam sting. Convicted on bribery and conspiracy charges and sentenced to prison.

Sammy Rivera (Democrat) Mayor, Passaic NJ; indicted and arrested on charges of accepting bribes in exchange for agreeing to direct municipal contracts to an insurance broker.

Alfred E. Steele (Democrat) General Assembly, NJ; arrested by the FBI in a Federal corruption probe for accepted $14,000 in bribes to steer insurance brokers new business from Newark, Orange, Passaic and Paterson, where he allegedly boasted that he could secure the business as he "had five votes on the City Council.

Mims Hackett (Democrat) NJ Assembly and City of Orange NJ Mayor; arrested by the FBI in a Federal corruption probe The indictment alleged that Hackett accepted $5,000 in bribes for his efforts to steer insurance business from the City of Orange, with an additional $25,000 to be accepted if the firm received the insurance business it sought.

Marcellus Jackson (Democrat) Passaic City Councilman: received 25 month sentence, a fine of $15,000 and three years of supervised probation for taking cash bribes totaling around $26,000 while serving on the city council.

Angelo Errichetti (Democrat) New Jersey State Senator; sentenced to six years in prison and fined $40,000 for his involvement in Abscam.

Robert Torricelli (Democrat) withdrew from the 2002 NJ Senate race with less than 30 days before the election because of controversy over personal gifts he took from a major campaign donor and questions about campaign donations from 1996. Censured by the Senate Ethics Committee for his relationship with Korean-American businessman David Chang, a Korean-American businessman who had given Torricelli tens of thousands of dollars in gifts, cash and appliances. Chang served a federal prison sentence for making illegal campaign contributions to Torricelli’s 1996 campaign.

Wayne R. Bryant (Democrat) State Senate NJ; sentenced to four years in federal prison convicted of bribery and fraud. Indicted on corruption charges for his alleged involvement in funneling millions to the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey in exchange for a no-show job to boost his pension. In exchange, of steering state money to the school.

New Jersey Governor James McGreevey resigned his office and publically admitted his relationship with his crony/lover Golan Cipel who resigned from a $100,000/yr job created by McGreevey.

William Jefferson Clinton was barred from practicing law in his home state after being impeached. He was not tried as prescribed in the Constitution.

Sandy Berger (Democrat) National Security Advisor during the Clinton Administration became the focus of a criminal investigation; fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified terrorism documents and handwritten notes from the National Archives during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings.

Hazel O’Leary (Democrat) Secretary of Energy during the Clinton Administration ; O’Leary took trips all over the world as Secretary with as many 50 staff members and at times rented a plane, which was used by Madonna during her concert tours.

Neil Goldschmidt (Democrat) Oregon governor, admitted to having an illegal sexual relationship with a 14-year-old teenager while he was serving as Mayor of Portland.

Barney Frank (Democrat) U.S. Representative admitted having paid a male prostitute, for sex and subsequently hiring him as his personal assistant, while he also used the congressman’s Washington apartment for prostitution.

Jerry Springer (Democrat) resigned from Cincinnati City Council in 1974 after admitting to paying a prostitute with a personal check, found in a police raid on a massage parlor.

Melvin Jay Reynolds (Democrat) U.S. Representative from Illinois convicted on sexual misconduct and obstruction of justice charges and sentenced to five years in prison.

Edward Kennedy (Democrat) U. S. Senator from Massachusetts. Who pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident, after his car plunged off a bridge on Chappaquiddick Island killing passenger Mary Jo Kopechne.

The DNC – The Federal Election Commission imposed $719,000 in fines against participants in the 1996 Democratic Party fundraising scandals involving contributions from China, Korea and other foreign sources. The Federal Election commission said it decided to drop cases against contributors of more than $3 million in illegal DNC contribution because the respondents left the country or the corporations were defunct.

Daniel David Rostenkowski ( Democrat ) U.S. Illinois Representative ; Indicted on 17 felony charges- pleaded guilty to two counts of misuse of public funds and sentenced to seventeen months in federal prison.

Charles Coles Diggs, Jr. (Democrat) U.S. Michigan Representative; convicted on eleven counts of mail fraud and filing false payroll forms- sentenced to three years in prison.

George Rogers (Democrat) Massachusetts State Senate; convicted of bribery in 1978, sentenced to two years in prison.

Don Siegelman (Democrat Governor Alabama) indicted in a bid-rigging scheme involving a maternity-care program. Accused along with his former chief of staff of helping Tuscaloosa physician Phillip Bobo rig bids. Accused of moving $550,000 from the state education budget to the State Fire College in Tuscaloosa so Bobo could use the money to pay off a competitor for a state contract for maternity care.

James C. Green (Democrat) North Carolina State House of Representatives. Acquitted of accepting a bribe from an undercover FBI agent, but then convicted of tax evasion.
Frederick Richmond (Democrat) U.S. Representative New York; Arrested in Washington, D.C., for soliciting sex from a minor and from an undercover police officer – pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. Pleaded guilty to tax evasion, marijuana possession, and improper payments to a federal employee.

Alcee Lamar Hastings (Democrat) U.S. Representative Florida; Impeached and removed from office as federal judge over bribery charges.

Marion Barry (Democrat) Mayor Washington, D.C.; convicted of cocaine possession after being caught on videotape smoking crack cocaine. Sentenced to six months in prison.

Mario Biaggi (Democrat) U.S. Representative New York; Indicted on federal charges that he had accepted bribes in return for influence on federal contracts. Convicted of obstructing justice and accepting illegal gratuities. Tried on federal racketeering charges and convicted on 15 felony counts.

Lee Alexander (Democrat) Mayor of Syracuse, N.Y; indicted over a $1.5 million kickback scandal. Pleaded guilty to racketeering and tax evasion charges. Served six years in prison.

Mary Rose Oakar (Democrat) U.S. Representative from Ohio; Pleaded guilty to two misdemeanor charges of funneling $16,000 through fake donors.
David Giles (Democrat) candidate for U.S. Representative from Washington. Convicted of child rape.

Gary Siplin (Democrat) Florida State Senator; found guilty of third-degree grand theft of $5,000 or more, a felony, and using services of employees for his candidacy.

Edward Mezvinsky (Democrat) U.S. Representative Iowa; Indicted on 56 federal fraud charges.

Lena Swanson (Democrat) Washington State Senate.; Pleaded guilty to charges of soliciting unlawful payments from veterans and former prisoners of war.

Abraham J. Hirschfeld (Democrat) NY candidate in Democratic primary for U.S. Senator Offered Paula Jones $1 million to drop her sexual harassment lawsuit against President Bill Clinton. Convicted in 2000 of trying to hire a hit man to kill his business partner.

Henry Cisneros (Democrat) U.S. Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of lying to the FBI.

James A. Traficant Jr. (Democrat) House of Representatives Ohio. Expelled from Congress after being convicted of corruption charges. Sentenced today to eight years in prison for accepting bribes and kickbacks.

John Doug Hays (Democrat) Kentucky State Senate: Found guilty of mail fraud for submitting false campaign reports stemming from an unsuccessful run for judge. Six months in prison followed by six months of home confinement and three years of probation.

Henry J. Cianfrani (Democrat) Pennsylvania State Senate; Convicted on federal charges of racketeering and mail fraud for padding his Senate payroll. Sentenced to five years in federal prison.

David Hall (Democrat) Governor of Oklahoma; Indicted on extortion and conspiracy charges. Convicted and sentenced to three years in prison.

John A. Celona (Democrat) Rhode Island state senator; charged with the three counts of mail fraud. For defrauding the state and collecting hundreds of thousands of dollars from CVS Corp. and others while serving in the legislature. Celona agreed to plead guilty to taking money from the CVS pharmacy chain and other companies that had interest in legislation. Received five years in federal prison on each of the three counts and a $250,000 fine.

Allan Turner Howe (Democrat) U.S. Representative Utah; Arrested for soliciting a policewoman posing as a prostitute.

Jerry Cosentino (Democrat) Illinois State Treasurer; Pleaded guilty to bank fraud – fined $5,000 and sentenced to nine months home confinement.

Joseph Waggonner Jr. (Democrat) U.S. Representative Louisiana; Arrested in Washington, D.C. for soliciting a policewoman posing as a prostitute

Albert G. Bustamante (Democrat) U.S. Representative Texas; Convicted on racketeering and bribery charges and sentenced to prison.

Lawrence Jack Smith (Democrat) U.S. Representative from Florida. Sentenced to three months in federal prison for tax evasion.

David Lee Walters (Democrat) Governor of Oklahoma; Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor election law violation.

James Guy Tucker, Jr. (Democrat) Arkansas Governor; Resigned after conviction on federal fraud charges as part of the Whitewater investigation.

Walter Rayford Tucker (Democrat) Compton, California Mayor and U.S. Representative California; Sentenced to 27 months in prison for extortion and tax evasion.

William McCuen (Democrat) Secretary of State Arkansas; Admitted accepting kickbacks from two supporters he gave jobs, and not paying taxes on the money. Admitted to conspiring with a political consultant to split $53,560 embezzled from the state in a sham transaction. He was indicted on corruption charges. Pleaded guilty to felony counts tax evasion and accepting a kickback. Sentenced to 17 years in prison.

Walter Fauntroy (Democrat) Delegate to U.S. Congress District of Columbia; Charged in federal court with making false statements on financial disclosure forms. Pleaded guilty to one felony count and sentenced to probation.

Carroll Hubbard, Jr. (Democrat) Kentucky State Senate and U.S. Representative from Kentucky; pleaded guilty to conspiring to defraud the Federal Elections Commission and to theft of government property; served two years in prison. Involved in the "Rubbergate" House banking scandal.

Joseph Kolter (Democrat) State House of Representatives and U.S. Representative Pennsylvania; Indicted by a Federal grand jury on five felony charges of embezzlement at the U.S. House post office. Pleaded guilty.

Nicholas Mavroules (Democrat) U.S. Representative Massachusetts; Pleaded guilty to charges of tax fraud and accepting gratuities while in office.

Carl Christopher Perkins (Democrat) State House of Representatives and U.S. Representative Kentucky ; Pleaded guilty to bank fraud in connection with the House banking scandal. Perkins wrote overdrafts totaling about $300,000. Pleaded guilty to charges of filing false statements with the Federal Election Commission and false financial disclosure reports. Sentenced to 21 months in prison.

Richard Hanna (Democrat) U.S. Representative California; Received payments of about $200,000 from a Korean businessman in what became known as the “Koreagate” influence buying scandal. Pleaded guilty and sentenced to federal prison.

Daniel Baugh Brewster (Democrat) U.S. Senator Maryland; Indicted on charges of accepting illegal gratuity while in Senate.

Thomas Joseph Dodd (Democrat) U.S. Senator Connecticut; Censured by the Senate for financial improprieties, having diverted $116,000 in campaign and testimonial funds to his own use.

Edward Fretwell Prichard, Jr. (Democrat) Delegate to Democratic National Convention Kentucky; Convicted of vote fraud in federal court in connection with ballot-box stuffing. Served five months in prison.

Guy Hamilton Jones, Sr. (Democrat) State Senate Arkansas; Convicted on federal tax charges and expelled from the Senate.

Otto Kerner, Jr (Democrat) Governor Illinois; while serving as Governor, he and another official made a gain of over $300,000 in a stock deal. Convicted on 17 counts of bribery, conspiracy, perjury, and related charges. Sentenced to three years in federal prison and fined $50,000.

George Crockett, Jr. (Democrat) U.S. Representative Michigan; Served four months in federal prison for contempt of court following his defense of a Communist leader on trial for advocating the overthrow of the government.

Mark B. Jimenez (Democrat fundraiser); sentenced to 27 months in prison on charges of tax evasion and conspiracy to defraud the United States and commit election financing offenses.

Bobby Lee Rush (Democrat) U.S. Representative Illinois; As a Black Panther, spent six months in prison on a weapons charge.

Bolley ”Bo” Johnson (Democrat); Former Florida House Speaker – received a two-year term for tax evasion.

Roger L. Green (Democrat) Brooklyn Assemblyman; Pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor for accepting travel reimbursement for trips he did not pay for and was sentenced to fines and probation.

Gloria Davis (Democrat) Bronx assemblywoman; Pleaded guilty to second-degree bribe-taking.

Rod Blagojevich (Democrat) Illinois Governor; corruption, sentenced to 14 years in Federal prison for trying to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat to the highest bidder.

Tony Rezko (Democrat) political fundraiser raised money for former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich and some cash for President Barack Obama; convicted on corruption charge, for extorting millions of dollars from firms seeking state business or regulatory approval.

Charles Powell Jr (Democratic Party chairman) East St. Louis, Ill; secretly recorded audiotapes Powell was heard talking about paying $5 per vote to get key Democrats elected. Convicted of scheming to buy votes with cash, cigarettes and liquor.

Clarence Norman Jr. (Democrat) leader of one of the largest Democratic Party organizations in the nation, found guilty of soliciting illegal campaign contributions. Convicted of extorting money from judicial candidates in exchange for party support. Found guilty of violating New York's election law and falsifying business records.

Joe Spicuzzo (Democrat) Middlesex County NJ Sheriff and Democrat Party Chairman; bribery and official misconduct. State prosecutors have offered a plea deal of seven years in prison, requiring at least two years before eligible for parole. He would also forfeit his pension, of $58,000 annually.

Sheila A. Dixon (Democrat) Baltimore Mayor; charged with 12 counts of felony theft, perjury, fraud and misconduct in office. Accused of using $3,400 in gift cards, some donated to her office for distribution to "needy families," to purchase Best Buy electronics and other items for herself and her staff, and recipient of $15,348 in gifts allegedly received from her former boyfriend, prominent city developer Ronald H. Lipscomb, while she was City Council president. If convicted on all charges, the she could be sentenced to 85 years in prison.

Charles Rangel (Democrat) US Representative NY; guilty of 11 of 13 counts of violating House ethics rules, and on December 2, the full House approved a sanction of censure against Rangel.

Rossmoor NJ - Mold Ignored in Senior Communities

2011-12-09T17:19:00.028-05:00

Environmental issues can turn a senior’s remaining years, meant to be a time of peace and relax, into a distressing struggle with ongoing illness. With increasing numbers of retired Americans, the risk of this air hazard in senior communities is especially important.

Individuals with many preexisting health issues, like seniors, need to be aware of the reactions mold spores can trigger. The presence of mold can lead to numerous health impacts on senior residents, including increased allergies, asthma difficulties and even cancer. Because mold spores continually travel throughout the indoor and outdoor air, if a facility has improper ventilation or indoor water leaks, these mold spores can land on these damp spots and reproduce. Furthermore, mold can grow on wood, paper, carpet or even foods. Also, no convenient way exists to rid a home of this threat.

Because of weakened immune systems and an inability to recover quickly, seniors remain at a heightened risk for suffering greatly from mold, making it vital to ensure a senior’s health, happiness and sense of independence.

Small recurring or continuous leaks that are hidden in walls, ceilings or floors present a challenge since mold growth could be extensive before it is detected. Mold can damage or destroy building materials such as the wood or gypsum board in homes.

After selling their beautiful home in Tennessee, my folks moved into Rossmoor retirement Community two years ago to be closer to their kids and remaining family.

They had purchased a home with an enclosed porch. After moving in and noticing a stain on the tile after it rained due to a water leak they called the Association about repairing it.

My folks were told that only the original residence of the ‘Association” was their responsibility and the Mutual was not responsible for any additions.

My folks then hired a roofing contractor to fix and seal the roof. It still leaked and the roofer said it was not the roof; water must be coming from somewhere else. My folks again called the ‘Association Director.’

The Association sent one of their Mutual’s ‘listed contractors’ come and look at it. After looking at it, they were told that it would cost $3200.

The contractor said that the building next door was the cause of the leak. He wanted $1600 to redo the porch roof, and told my folks to pay $1600 to the Association for the repair of the siding. They told my folks, it was because of the porch addition was the reason the siding from the residence next door that caused the leak. The porch is only a 10 x 12; $3200 is a lot of money for a roof that did not need any replacement. My folks did not live there when the porch was added on.

After two years of a leaking every time it rained, nothing was resolved. Being they were told it was their responsibility, my folks finally hired another reputable contractor who repaired the siding of the attached residence that was causing the problem. In repairing the siding they noticed the wood under it was soggy, wet, and rotted. I climbed up into my folk’s attic and was able to push the wood in and out with my finger, as it was so saturated. He mentioned that the wood behind the siding must have been leaking long before the porch addition was added due to the extent of water damage. The contractor repaired the siding and for the last two rains it has not leaked, so it was not the porch roof that was the problem.

The repair was done at a cost considerably lower than the $3200, and my folks submitted the bill to the ‘Association’ to be reimbursed for the repair which was not unreasonable compared to the fee of the Mutual's contractor.

The ‘Association’ said they would sue my folks for touching their property, even though the wood is still rotted underneath, the leak was fixed.

Also, the first ceiling tile I replaced, after I tarred and sealed the roof when they first moved in, had mold on it.

When my dad mentioned the mold, the Association director says she has mold in her closet, she gets it on her shoes and purse, and to just brush it off, it’s no big deal.

My folks are pushing 90, and they should not have to deal with this at this point in their life, all they did was purchase a home and expect that in be in livable condition, or at least have a pre-existing conditon fixed without the threat of being fined for correcting an ignored problem.

It was at this point that I found out when calling the State Advocate, “Helga”, regarding mold, they said they cannot do anything about mold in the retirement communities because they govern themselves and all retirement communities are the same! If it was a private home and not part of the Association they could do something about it.

Calling Monroe Township Representatives the response wasn’t any better. Monroe Township officials echoed the same sentiments. If you have mold and live in a retirement community, the Association’s laws supersedes the state and local laws on mold.

Basically, anyone who has mold that belongs to a Mutual in any particular Association can mask the problem and sell it to another unsuspecting buyer. By going ahead and taking action to resolve the issue after continued inaction of the ‘Association’, seniors are then told they will be sued.

Whether it is a private residence or a retirement community, mold is a serious health issue. If this were a private residence or business establishment, they would be shut down or told to evacuate the building until the environmental remediation process was completed.

At minimum, either a local or state agency should be able to investigate to see if a potential problem exists. I would like to see our state legislators take action on this issue. How an adult community can sweep a health hazard under the rug even though it affects the health of its residents, wipe their hands clean of any responsibility, and evade state or local jurisdiction, is beyond me.

UPDATE:
After several dizzy spells and a waking up with a non-stop nosebleed my Dad was recently discharged from the hospital. Coincidence?

Assemblyman John Wisniewski is disingenuous in his remarks about NJ Governor

2011-12-07T10:11:00.001-05:00

NJ Assemblyman John Wisniewski is somewhat disingenuous in stating “Gov. Christie was governor for the highest property tax increase in four years last year, all while he twice protected tax breaks for millionaires. In protecting tax cuts for the wealthy, the governor and legislative Republicans denied vital property tax relief for the middle-class homeowners and seniors struggling to keep their homes. New York’s elected officials have come together to do the right thing, and New Jersey Republicans should follow their lead.”

It took the election of a Republican governor to wake up the Democrats?

Years of a Democrat controlled state under James McGreevey and Jon Corzine, a failed “asset monetization” plan, 115 tax increases, an increase in the sales tax, gave us a combined state/local property taxes of $2,372.43 per capita. New Jersey’s combined per capita collections give us the dubious honor of being the highest in the nation. If they were doing such a great job before Christie, there would still be a Democrat governor in Trenton.

New Jersey taxpayers receive less federal funding per dollar of federal taxes paid than any other state. Per dollar of federal tax paid in 2005, New Jersey citizens received approximately $0.61 in the way of federal spending, a decline from 1995 when New Jersey received $0.68 per dollar of taxes in federal spending (second lowest). What have the Democrat’s done in all those years to see that we receive our fair share?

Assemblyman Wisniewski and the Democrat legislation was MIA during all that time and are just now worried about tax relief for struggling middle-class homeowners and seniors?

They now have the gall to talk about partisan politics.

Has the Obama Job Market Really Improved?

2011-12-03T10:08:00.004-05:00

Before President Obama and the Democrats get too smug about the new unemployment rate it is important to recognize how the numbers lie.

The actual unemployment rate in the United States is in excess of 22%, that’s one in five Americans who are without meaningful labor.

Having added a net of 120,000 new jobs with 315,000 job-seekers falling off the radar and stopped looking for work in November is not a stellar record to go around thumping your upper torso.

In actuality we lost ground and the 8.6% unemployment rate that will be highly touted by the Administration and Congressional Democrats is a fallacy. Going from to 8.6% from 9%, is a gift that looks nice under the tree but is a little disappointing when the wrapping comes off.

It would take about 150,000 new jobs a month just to keep up with population growth, and it is mathematically impossible for the 120,000 created this month to have reduced the U.S. unemployment rate, let alone generate one of the largest one-month declines in history.

What the lower rate really means is that 315,000 people left the workforce, which outnumbered the 278,000 who actually found work.

In a healthy labor market, the number of people working and the labor force would be growing respectively.

Considering this is the Holiday season, it’s a little too early to celebrate as many of these jobs created are only part time positions are seasonal related and will disappear after the first of the year. The word is temporary.

More than 13 million Americans are officially counted as unemployed. Workers who dropped out of the labor market aren’t counted as part of the unemployed because they no longer collect benefits, and therefore are no longer part of the labor force. About one-third, or approximately 3 million, of those who lost their jobs during the recession have recovered or are on their way to recovery.

Only 7 percent of those who lost their jobs were able to find another job that allowed them to maintain the financial situation and lifestyle they had before becoming unemployed.

In the second quarter of 2011, unemployment claims in Middlesex County, NJ alone, were 35,761. Included in those numbers were 7,000 searching for work that have a bachelor’s degree or higher, and were part of those 35,761 claims. Out of that total 6,632 residents of Middlesex County exhausted all of their unemployment insurance.

The economy will continue to grow at the same pace through the rest of 2011 and all of 2012, indicating that a sustained recovery still hasn’t started, more than two years after the end of the Great Recession.

Even with a job market rebound, the non-recovery recovery continues as those who recently found work will hang on to their money, buying only essentials needed. On the flip side, those of us fortunate enough to have work or not been out of work, last month was a pretty good month.

In 2003 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi criticized job creation as “Far From Enough.” “The slight increase in jobs last month is wonderful news for 57,000 Americans. But the 2.1 million Americans who have been actively looking for work for more than two years … know that it is far from enough.”

In 2004, Sen. Dick Durbin claimed Bush “Created a Climate … Where the Number of Jobs Is Not Growing.” Stating “This President has created a climate in this country where the number of jobs is not growing. It did not have to be that way.”

In 2005, Pelosi called job creation numbers “Anemic.” “Today’s anemic jobs numbers confirm that President Bush has still failed to create a single new private-sector job since he became President.”

And again in 2006, Pelosi claimed Bush policies “favored the privileged few at the expense of America’s working families, claiming “Democrats will restore the Economic Security of America’s working families.”

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics 5.7 million jobs had been created under Bush.

While in 2008 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid claimed Bush had a “shameful history of losing American jobs.”

In February 2009, Obama pledged that his Stimulus Plan would create 3.5 million jobs by the end of 2010. ‘We have begun the essential work of keeping the American dream alive in our time.’

At the end of 2010, 2.8 million jobs were lost, since Obama signed his $787 billion 'Stimulus',. after saying it would create 3.5 million jobs.

Obama had said in 2008, “The Yardstick should be … Am I Creating These Jobs?”

As Pelosi's spewed her tirade of “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs … We will measure our success in that way; and hopefully the American people will, too, in the next election.”

Democrats needed to create 6.3 million jobs in 2010 to meet their own standards.

It is now 2011, the jobs climate is not any better and the outlook does not look any brighter.

Improvement in the economy the job market won’t happen until consumer confidence begins to build. As long as the threat of tax increases with excessive regulations continue being put forward by this administration there will be a hindrance to real growth.

Things may look good on the surface, especially when government cheerleaders push the ‘hope and change’ optimism to unsuspecting kool-aiders around the country. In reality, not much has changed. The unemployment numbers remain abysmal and our economy is teetering on the threshold of a complete collapse.

The Titanic is sinking and the BLS plays on, hoping we won’t notice our socks are getting wet.

Minimum-Wage Hikes Lower Workers’ Prospects

2011-11-25T12:12:00.000-05:00

The Times, Saturday, June 9, 2007
by Joe Sinagra

'The following article was written by me in 2007 when running for NJ State Assembly, and published in the Trenton Times.'

The minimum wage is supposed to help those at the lower end of the income scale to make a better living. When the minimum wage rises, in actuality, the exact opposite occurs, resulting in a higher unemployment rate among that same income class. The small businesses that employ them suffer, as well.

With an increase in the minimum wage, the small percentage of people who depend on the minimum hourly rate to live on will fall into a higher tax category and they may lose benefits. Study after study has found that as labor rates rise, job competition heats up, allowing employers to hire workers with better skills.

I do not believe the minimum wage increase has helped anyone – already we are seeing companies laying off workers or closing.

Minimum-wage laws affect ethnic minorities more so than other groups. The unemployment rate for white teens ages 16 and 17 was 17.3 percent in 2005. The same figures for Hispanic and black teens were 25 percent and 40.9 percent, respectively. A rule of thumb established by the Journal of Economic Literature is that a 10 percent increase in a minimum wage leads roughly to a 2 percent hike in teen unemployment – we just had a 40 percent increase. Is it better to have no job at $7.25 an hour or a guaranteed job at $6.15 an hour?

An increase in the minimum wage means that unemployment rates among ethnic minorities and teens will climb higher, giving thousands of currently employed workers a “livable” wage of zero.

Many union contracts have formulas tiered off of the minimum wage. As the minimum wage increase, every union salary level increases, too. The ability of unions to obtain wages above market rate is improved, as the price of competing non-union labor goes higher. Large employers who pay more than the minimum (Wal-Mart being the most recent example) also push for higher minimum wages, making it more difficult for low-wage competitors to keep employees.

As the actual wage increases, so do payroll taxes, unemployment, disability, etc., the “hidden” taxes. Any minimum-wage increase creates a larger burden on employers.

There has been talk of creating a livable wage anywhere from $11 to $16 an hour, along with bringing back jobs to New Jersey. To the contrary, mandatory minimum wage or livable wage increases will force companies to leave the state or the country.

Small businesses account for the bulk of new job growth. Mandating a higher minimum wage means that a small business will either have to let someone go, or not hire the next person who walks through the door. Many small-business owners need a minimum amount of employees to compete against the larger chains. When they are forced to let employees go, they cannot compete. By keeping them, they either absorb costs or lose what little completive edge they have.

When a company is forced to raise its wages, it is also forced to reduce hours, or cut jobs to sustain a profit margin. Higher labor costs tend to replace marginal employees with self-service options or automation. In other words, employers will replace less-skilled employees with machines or reduce services to customers by, for example, automating their telephone receptionists, expecting fast-food diners to bus their own tables an shoppers to scan and bag their own groceries.

A business doesn’t have more money available for payroll because a minimum wage is mandated. As the minimum wage increases, businesses are required to pay their workers more than what they are worth. No one would willingly pay someone $7.25 an hour for a product or service worth $4 and still expect to stay in business. The business would have to lay off some workers to free up enough cash to pay those still on staff. It must either make do with a staff it can afford or go out of business, putting all of the employees out of work and creating more unemployment.

In the absence of minimum wage laws, would employers pay lower than minimum or less? No. Competition in the labor market forces employers to pay the higher wages; many businesses today pay their employees more than the minimum wage. I believe that by eliminating the minimum wage, more job opportunities for the unskilled and minorities will be created and there will be more room for negotiation between employer and employee.

For low-wage earners fortunate enough to survive losing their job, it doesn’t necessarily help them, either. Employers will react to the higher wages by adjusting other areas of employee compensation, such as health insurance or other benefits.

If small-business owners must face increasing costs, then they must be allowed to form co-ops through which they can purchase low-cost health-care coverage to help offset forced government increases.

When forcing a business to pay its workers more, the money has to come from somewhere, usually in the form of increased prices for goods and services. Workers who are making more money because of a minimum-wage increase will end up spending more to buy items they need to survive, ending right back where they started. As stated in a recent article, “inflation has eroded the minimum wage’s buying power to the lowest level in about 50 years.”

In the end, as consumer prices continue to rise, so will inflation, and the minimum wage will still be the minimum wage.

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan sponsors bill putting drunk drivers back behind the wheel

2011-11-23T06:56:00.003-05:00

After voting in favor of 115 tax increases and his promise to stabilize taxes if he were reelected, one week after winning an election, Assemblyman Diegnan wants to put drunk drivers back on the road.

Over 40% of fatal automobile accidents are alcohol-related. Alcohol-related motor vehicle accidents claim 17,000 American lives each year, which is roughly the equivalent of one death every 30 to 45 minutes. Adults who drank too much got behind the wheel of a moving vehicle about 112 million times in 2010.

Allowing a ‘restricted’ driver a second attempt to kill or maim an innocent bystander because they were lucky enough to get stopped before they had the opportunity the first time, is a game of chance waiting for a tragedy.

Instead of dealing with the horrible economy and tax environment he created, Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan has once again displayed how out of touch he is with his constituents.

http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111128/NJOPINION0202/311280005/Diegnan-wants-give-drunken-drivers-2nd-chance

College Grads want to wipe away their Student Debt . . . after they graduate!

2011-11-19T23:52:00.000-05:00

According to the Home News Tribune Editors, President Obama and Congress must give immediate consideration to recovery packages that provide for billions of dollars in student loan debt forgiveness.

“Look at student loan debt forgiveness as the jump start on the economic engine. By forgiving $70 billion in federal student loans immediately, and dedicating stimulus funding to help pay down tens of... billions more in private lending debt, the government can free billions in graduates’ income that can be expected to be put directly into the economy.. . "

So anyone that wants to sign up for college and get a free education is not responsible for paying off their loans? Those who did not have the means or the funds to attend would receive the brunt of this, if that were to happen, guess who would have a leg up on getting a job? That would mean the lesser educated working class would be out of work, so how about debt forgiveness on their mortgages so they don’t lose their homes? What happens to those who worked their way through college to get an education, are they entitled to a refund?

Having Obamacare forced upon the American public is OK, and forgiving debt on those who had the means and ability to attend college would be OK. Those with an education would be able to afford to pay for the government mandated health care, as those who did not go to college or those who did and dropped out because they had enough sense to realize that had to work to start paying down their debt, won’t be able to make mandated payments.

Anyone receiving an education gaining over $50,000 in debt had better make sure they can get a job in their field earning enough to pay it back, before they continue getting deeper in debt.

The article continues to state “. . . graduates can’t shed their student loans, even in bankruptcy. With fewer well-paying jobs available for new graduates, it can be assumed those degrees are worth a tiny fraction of their cost.” Knowing that . . . why would anyone knowingly continue to go deeper into debt?

Those going to college must realize all that debt they racked up needs to get paid back at some point, or are they oblivious to how it is going to get paid off? Or does the realization for graduates only set in after commencement when the first note becomes due?

At what point does a college student realize that it is impossible to pay back what they owe, halfway through their education or just before they graduate?

Perhaps college consultants need to advise students of going to a less expensive college, or the reality of finding a job in their field of study, and the odds of receiving that position due to the competition upon graduation.

Joe Sinagra says Thank You to All

2011-11-09T14:23:00.005-05:00

I would like to thank the voters in the 18^th District, who took a few minutes out of their lives to come out and show their support.

It is almost impossible to repay all the dedicated people who believed in our campaign. The unselfishness of all the volunteers who gave up their days, evenings, weekends to work the phone banks, going door to door, and handing out of literature literally leaves me speechless, many who went above and beyond what was asked of them, there are no words that can express my gratitude, and the many friends and family who have given kind words of comfort, along with countless others. I would also like to mention our Treasurer Andria, who did a great job on keeping the finances in line. I can’t forget our Campaign Manager Mandi, who practically lived at the headquarters from the day she was hired. Many thanks to Rick Rosenberg and Mark Duffy.

I also need to thank Assembly Leader, Alex DeCroce for his overwhelming generosity in donating to our campaign. The State GOP who targeted the 18^th district this year and made this a competitive campaign! Lt. Gov Kim Guadagno for making a stop at Edison’s Campaign Headquarters, and Governor Chris Christie for making a detour in his busy schedule to come to Edison to give our campaign a boost. Their help in helping our base with a three day 72 hour GOTV was a much needed shot of adrenalin that kept our voulunteers focused. My only regret is not that I didn't win, is that once more I am unable to represent those who cast their vote in their belief that I could best represent them.

Considering the 18^th District lost Spotswood and gained Highland Park which has a primarily Democrat voter base, the gauntlet was set from the onset. I believe we had a very successful campaign in spite of the outcome, as the odds were in the favor of the opposition due to redistricting, and they of course will have larger margins of win percentages as their voter base is larger.

I don't believe our opponents won anything other than their own voter base. I doubt that a large majority of Middlesex County Republicans voted to keep the current status quo. I do believe on the flip side there were many Democrats who voted on the Republican ticket this year, and I find it amusing that our opponents spent a massive amount of funds to win their own voter base.

One commercial accused me of being a Tea Party extremist. Before the Tea Party came into prominence, I have always run as a fiscal conservative. I don't see how wanting to lower property taxes, putting more disposable income back into the pockets of the taxpayers, and creating jobs by giving business owners the tools needed to expand and grow makes one an extremist. As a matter of record it was because of being a fiscal conservative is the reason the Tea Party supported me.

We were endorsed by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) and I was endorsed by the Commerce and Industry of New Jersey (CIANJ) three times in a row. I would think that our opponents record of voting YES to increase our taxes 115 times is a bit extreme, to say the least.

It says something when the arrogance of your opponents who are so sure of winning, won't take the time to debate the issues.

My counterpart on the ticket, Marcia Silva made it a pleasure to run for office this year, a successful attorney, a single mom raising two kids, a centralist on many of the issues. (Many wouldn’t know that by our opponents commercials and attacks.) Somehow she managed to run, in my book, a household, a job, a successful campaign and still maintain her sanity.

To finish out the thank you list I certainly can’t forget my wife, who had the patience in putting up with me throughout the season. I think halfway through the campaign she may have started thinking of me as a renter who was using the garage to store political stuff.

There will be other races, who knows, if the support is there in the future, I may have another campaign left in me . . . after I check with the wife of course.

Joe Sinagra & Marcia Silva Assembly Race: Legislative District 18

2011-11-06T06:40:00.002-05:00

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan's view on holding office as an elected official:
"I'm outraged that every two years me and a lot of other people in this state have to put up with this baloney, I find it personally insulting." ~ Patrick Diegnan (18th District Assemblyman)__________________________________________________________________________

By Matthew Kassel, November 6

Two hopeful Republicans, Marcia Silva and Joseph Sinagra, are working to unseat the Democratic incumbent Assemblymen Peter J. Barnes, III and Patrick J. Diegnan in the heavily Democratic 18th District.

Barnes has served on the Edison City Council for 12 years and was its president for two. He has been in the Assembly since 2007 and currently is serving as Majority Whip. He chairs the Judiciary Committee.

As a lawyer, Barnes handles litigation cases mostly in the state courts in central New Jersey and is the past president of the Middlesex County Bar Association. “I like to think that I came to the table with a lot of experience before I served in the legislature,” he said.

Barnes was endorsed by the Sierra Club and the Service Employees International Union’s New Jersey State Council. To the Assemblyman, the four most important issues in New Jersey are jobs, property taxes, the environment and helping businesses.

“There’s no question that the recession has really affected New Jersey in a really profound way,” he said.

In the budget committee, Barnes focused on funding transit hubs and making cities aware of grants and programs available. He has sponsored bills to entice businesses to enter New Jersey and for capping property taxes.

Diegnan, his running mate, has served in the Assembly since 2002. He chairs the Education Committee and serves as Deputy Speaker and Parliamentarian.

The most important issue to him is education.

“It’s becoming the hot topic in the state, concerning charter schools, vouchers,” he said. “I think there should be community support for charter schools. I don’t support vouchers.”

Diegnan sponsored a bill, which passed the Assembly on a bipartisan basis, to require that charter schools be approved only after a referendum in each municipality affected.

Like his running mate, Diegnan believes another important issue in the state is job creation.

“We really just have to come together and spread economic growth in New Jersey,” he said. “We have to reevaluate our property tax structure; it is just so burdensome.” Diegnan labeled Silva and Sinagra extremists.

“My opponents have publicly stated support for the Tea Party, and that certitude is not healthy for the process,” he said.

But Silva, who is a public defender, denies this charge.

“The other side has tried to align me with the Tea Party and other groups that I’ve never had anything to do with in my life,” she said. “I’m more of a centrist.”

Democratic East Brunswick Mayor David Stahl endorsed Silva in a surprise move in September and Silva said that has helped her chances.

“The people I’ve spoken to door to door have said to me they’d be supporting me because of the mayor’s endorsement,” she said.

Taxes and creating jobs are her big issues.

Silva is optimistic about her chances. “People should vote for me because I’m different, but I’m ordinary,” she said. “I’m the average person, and I’m not a politician, and I will always put the people first.”

Sinagra works for Miele as a facilities manager, has owned and operated several small businesses and served on the Helmetta Borough Council for nine years. He ran unsuccessfully in 2007 and 2009 for the Assembly and was a congressional candidate in 2005.

Although Barnes cites his small business experience to counter his opponents, Sinagra -- along with Silva -- received the Independent Business Federation endorsement early in October. The Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey also endorsed Sinagra.

Sinagra’s big issues are taxes, jobs, and the economy.

“I plan to lessen some of the mandates that are placed on business owners and eliminate some of the taxes that place burdens on small businesses, helping them to expand and grow and be able to hire more people,” he said.

Sinagra think he understands the importance of serving others, a quality he feels his opponents do not have.

Said Sinagra, “It seems to me they’re more concerned about holding their own job than representing the people of the state.”

PAT DIEGNAN REALLY NEEDS A VACATION BECAUSE $1.5 MILLION DOESN’T GO AS FAR AS IT USED

2011-11-01T13:37:00.000-04:00

By Greg Volpe - November 1st, 2011
18th District Republican candidates Joe Sinagra and Marcia Silva reminded voters that they can wish Pat Diegnan Bon Voyage next week.

Diegnan, who collected more than $1.5 million from eight taxpayer-funded politically-appointed jobs over the last decade when New Jersey lost 156,000 private-sector jobs lamented recently that he didn’t take a vacation this summer.

“I guess $1.5 million doesn’t go as far as it used to if Pat Diegnan had to spend the summer focusing on the many public jobs he holds instead of taking a luxurious vacation,” 18th District Republican Assembly candidate Joe Sinagra said today. “I hope he spent his summer at home learning that drawing multiple public salaries just takes money from people and increases taxes instead of lowering taxes to help the private sector create jobs.”

Sinagra was pointing to answers provided by Diegnan to the Home News Tribune: “Every family has cut back and makes do with less. For example, my wife and I are driving older model cars and we didn’t take a vacation this summer.” Sinagra’s response is posted here: http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111031/NJNEWS10/310310017/Joseph-Sinagra-Republican.

The response from his running mate, Marcia Silva, is posted here: http://www.mycentraljersey.com/article/20111031/NJNEWS10/310310016/Marcia-Silva-Republican.
“Too many people in New Jersey do not get vacations from the high taxes and high unemployment that were created by the fiscal policies supported by Trenton Democrats like Pat Diegnan and Peter Barnes,” Silva said. “But if Mr. Diegnan really laments his summer at home, voters, who have given him many paychecks over the years, can send him on a permanent vacation from the Legislature next week.”

Diegnan’s latest financial disclosure form can be viewed here: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/ethics/FinancialDisclosure/DiegnanP2010.pdf.

###

Contact Info:

Greg Volpe 609 989-7300

.

Diegnan and Barnes Not So Transparent Advertising

2011-10-29T08:25:00.000-04:00

"I'm outraged that every two years me and a lot of other people in this state have to put up with this baloney, I find it personally insulting." ~ Patrick Diegnan (18th District Assemblyman)

The TV ads attack my running mate on her salary when she worked at the prosecutor's office . . . what you don’t hear is that Assemblyman Peter Barnes brother Patrick also worked as a prosecutor, making the same salary my running mate previously did before going into private practice . . . and not a word can be heard.

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan Saves Himself, not Those He Represents

2011-10-27T16:29:00.000-04:00

Trying to shake up Buono, GOP State Committee zeroes in on Diegnan in LD18

2011-10-21T20:03:00.003-04:00

PolitickerNJ By Max Pizarro | October 21st, 2011 - 6:44pm

Political forward observers said it would happen and it just did.

The almost clear, post industrial skies of the Democratic Party-leaning 18^th District filled with a steady, two-week GOP barrage targeting the team of Senate Majority Leader Barbara Buono (D-18).

The heaviest artillery fire – in fact, all of it – landed on Buono’s running mate, Assemblyman Pat Diegnan (D-18), South Plainfield, in the form of five mailers paid for by the Republican State Committee and launched after the ELEC’s 29-day pre-election day deadline.

Its coffers boosted by nationwide barmstorming by Gov. Chris Christie, the GOP sneak attack bombarded Diegnan as a public dime attorney.

“The devastation of the Great Recession was not felt by Pat Diegnan who was paid quite well while many in New Jersey lost their jobs, homes and life savings,” said 18^th District Republican Assembly Candidate Joe Sinagra of Helmetta, irritated by Diegan making $1.5 million since 2000 from public paychecks.

“Pat Diegnan approved 115 tax increases last decade including many such as taxes on payroll, income and sales, which had a direct impact on the businesses that shed jobs,” the Republican challenger added. “If you hear Pat Diegnan talking about creating jobs, be sure to ask whether he’s talking about creating jobs for us, or creating jobs for himself that we’ll pay for.”

A New Jersey Education Association (NJEA) point person and impediment to the GOP governor's charter schools agenda, Diegan brushed off the attack as the handiwork of Tea Party extremists.

“A portion of that is my assembly salary,” said the incumbent Democrat, who currently retains one contract in Spotswood.

“But, look, I’m not embarrassed by that. I’m proud of my public service record. I’m brought of having served in South Plainfield and Millstone, and served with Democratic, Republican and nonpartisan mayors. Believe me, these are not no-show jobs.”

The assemblyman said he doesn’t intend to go negative, but couldn’t help scratching his head over the employment record of one of his rivals: Sinagra running mate Marcia Silva.

“The only jobs Pat Diegnan created are ones that drain tax dollars,” jabbed Silva, a former Assistant Middlesex County prosecutor.

That flabbergasted Diegnan.

“She is the public defender in South River!” exclaimed the incumbent Democrat. “If she thinks it’s improper for me to serve in the assembly, she must think the same about herself.”

The CW here is the state GOP doesn’t want to wound Diegnan so much as rattle top-of-the ticket incumbent Buono, a potential 2013 challenger to Christie.

Although Sinagra ran against Diegnan two years ago and came within 2,000 votes in a roughly 24,000 to 26,000 loss, some sources attribute 2009’s relative closeness to anti-Corzine rage more than anything.

The Democrats say they know anger abides – admit rage might be the better word at this point, and the GOP is definitely working with the idea that the atmosphere may be sufficiently combustible for LD 18 Dem casualties.

In a statement, GOP Campaign Manager Mandi Stirone made sure Buono's and Diegnan’s running mate, Assemblyman Peter Barnes (D-18) didn’t go undinged in making the GOP case.

“Pat Diegnan and Peter Barnes are Trenton politicians who have made life harder for working class families,” Stirone said. “…Joe Sinagra and Marcia Silva are fresh faces with new ideas. They are committed to work across the party aisle to make Middlesex County and New Jersey more affordable again and to create good paying jobs. Joe and Marcia fighting to make sure life in New Jersey is better for their children and grandchildren. They aren’t looking for the next taxpayer funded politically appointed position."

A Republican source told PolitickerNJ.com the intent with the mail is a very real attempt to demolish Diegnan, remove a rumble strip from Christie's education designs and steal an Assembly seat in the process. But most insider sources on both sides still say the Republican's ultimate target here remains Buono, who Democrats say has solid approval numbers in her home district, and who appears focused on using a senate re-election victory as leverage for a statewide run against the governor.

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan hired his Wife and Daughter to work in his legislative office

2011-10-19T16:50:00.005-04:00

Published in the Home News Tribune 11/02/03 - 18th District: Democrat Patrick Diegnan faces ethic questions after he hired both his wife and daughter to work in his legislative office . . . Diegnan also holds municipal attorney positions in his district.

Can NJ's 18th District Afford to Keep the Status Quo?

2011-10-17T20:16:00.000-04:00

Supports Silva, Sinagra for Assembly

2011-10-17T07:37:00.000-04:00

It is incredible how our Democratic representatives in the 18th Legislative District are so far out of touch with their constituents and are once again trying to fool them. Just read state Sen. Buono’s news release reacting to Mayor Stahl’s endorsement of Republican Marcia Silva for the Assembly Monday: “Patrick, Peter and I are unshakable partners in the fight for families across Central Jersey”... “We worked to help middle-class families get tax relief by asking millionaires to pay their fair share”... “Reforming education funding”...

Let see how they worked for the middle-class:

? They let the millionaire tax expire.

? They voted for every tax increase that came in front of them during the Corzine and McGreevey years.

? The education reform she is talking about was to give more money to schools with no strings attached (your tax money), in an effort to secure teachers’ votes for the next election, all the while fighting at every level the real reform that Governor Christie proposed.

? The ethics reform proposed by our governor has been sitting on their desks with no action for more than one year.

Where were Barnes, Diegnan and Buono when Corzine, McGreevey and other governors balanced their budgets on the backs of the same people they now claim to fight for?

Is this the kind of representatives you want to re-elect? They don’t deserve it. In this election give a chance to two hardworking newcomers, not career politicians, vote for Marcia Silva and Joe Sinagra for the Assembly.

Miklos Bognar Sr.

EAST BRUNSWICK

DIEGNAN AND BARNES: TWO BIG FS ACCORDING TO INDEPENDENT TAXPAYER ALLIANCE

2011-10-11T22:48:00.000-04:00

If taxpayers needed proof beyond their high tax bills that Pat Diegnan and Peter Barnes have failed them in Trenton, the duo failed an independent review conducted by the New Jersey Taxpayer Alliance, 18th District Republican Assembly candidates Joseph Sinagra and Marcia Silva said today.

“The big F’s that Pat Diegnan and Peter Barnes received for their destructive tax-raising, jobs-killing policies should be a prelude to the boot out the door they will get from the taxpayers they failed to represent in Trenton,” Sinagra, the former Helmetta Council President, said. “Pat Diegnan’s policies are so wrong for taxpayers and job creation that he is one of four Assembly members to vote against capping property taxes.

“Pat Diegnan basically told property taxpayers who have the highest bills in the nation that he doesn’t care how high they go,” Sinagra added.

The Taxpayer Alliance rated legislators based on eight critically important votes from the previous session, including, income tax increases, pension reform and property tax cap. Pat Diegnan scored 43 percent; Peter Barnes scored 57 percent.

“The low scores are more than a poor reflection on our opponents, but represent high taxes and job destruction that they have supported in Trenton,” said Silva, a former Assistant Middlesex County Prosecutor who is now a successful small business owner.

“The good news is that if voters send low-tax, job-growth candidates like Joe and me to Trenton, we’ll be able to reverse the damage caused by Trenton politicians like Diegnan and Barnes.

The 2011 New Jersey Taxpayers Alliance Legislative Scorecards are available at http://www.njtaxalliance.org/scorecards.html.

SINAGRA AND SILVA: DIEGNAN AND BARNES OPPOSED PENSION REFORM THAT DELIVERED $267M IN PROPERTY TAX RELIEF

2011-10-06T06:10:00.002-04:00

SOUTH RIVER -- 18TH District Republican Assembly candidates Joseph Sinagra and Marcia Silva called on their opponents, Pat Diegnan and Peter Barnes, to repeat their objections to the historic pension reform now that Governor Christie announced it will deliver $267 million worth of property tax relief this year.

“Assemblyman Diegnan and Barnes were wrong to oppose the pension reform that fixed a long-festering property for taxpayers and public employers that was heightened by their tax and spend policies,” Sinagra said. “I’d like to see them reaffirm their opposition to this historic reform now that it’s delivering $267 million worth of property taxes to homeowners and businesses.

“This is real relief for families and will help enable businesses to create jobs,”Sinagra added.

Governor Christie announced today the total amount of savings enabled by the Legislature’s historic pension reform enacted this summer, which had bipartisan support except for Diegnan and Barnes.

“In the one of the defining votes of their political careers, Diegnan and Barnes voted against taxpayers and public workers, and for more stifling tax bills that destroyed our economy,” Silva said. “Diegnan and Barnes were a road block to reform, but fortunately they were steam rolled.”

“PENPAC ENDORSES NJ 18TH DISTRICT PRO-BUSINESS PRO-JOB ASSEMBLY CANDIDATES MARCIA SILVA and JOE SINAGRA"

2011-10-04T13:50:00.000-04:00

The Private Enterprise Political Action Committee (PENPAC) announced its endorsements of pro-business, pro-jobs candidates seeking General Assembly seats in districts throughout New Jersey.

“Our board of trustees was impressed by these candidates. They understand our philosophy and they want to create jobs, lower taxes, eliminate burdensome regulations and rein in government to make New Jersey more competitive,” said Richard Goldberg, chairman of PENPAC, which is affiliated with the Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey.

Independent Business Federation picks Joe Sinagra and Marcia Silva over tax-hiking incumbents in NJ's 18th District

2011-10-04T13:43:00.002-04:00

Joseph Sinagra and Marcia Silva, 18th District Republican Assembly candidates, received the endorsement of the New Jersey National Federation of Independent Business, yet another sign that the incumbents’ failed tax-hiking policies must be eliminated in order to spur job creation in New Jersey.

“Patrick Diegnan voted to raise taxes by nearly $10 billion over the last decade. Peter Barnes voted for $3.4 billion worth of tax increase, but that’s just because he’s had fewer years to inflict damage on the economy,” Sinagra said. “It’s clear that our opponents have been part of the Trenton Democrat machine, whose tax and spend philosophy placed New Jersey jobs on the endangered species list.

“New Jersey will never be affordable for residents and businesses that create jobs unless we get rid of tax-hikers like our opponents and send Marcia and me to Trenton to implement the responsible fiscal policies our residents deserve and our businesses need to thrive and hire more people,” Sinagra said.

Sinagra, the former Helmetta Council President, and Silva, a former Assistant Middlesex County Prosecutor who is now a successful small business owner, pointed to the 156,000 private-sector jobs lost in New Jersey as proof that the taxing policies supported by their opponents are bad for New Jersey, especially because the state has regained 50,000 private-sector jobs over the past two years when Republican fiscal policies have been enacted.

“As a small business owner, I know how important it is to have a stable financial picture in order to plan, grow and add employees,” Silva said. “I am proud that NFIB is supporting Joe and I because we are committed to reducing government spending to make New Jersey affordable for residents and businesses so that we can continue to replace the private-sector jobs our families need right now.

“The Diegnan-Barnes team was complicit in making tens of thousands of New Jersey jobs disappear,” Silva added. “We will bring those jobs back.”

Diegnan and Barnes and Yet Another Tax Increase

2011-09-15T22:13:00.000-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Mandi Stirone
September 14, 2011 (732) 238-2418

Diegnan and Barnes and Yet Another Tax Increase

LD 18 Assembly Challenger: Gas Tax Just One of 115 Reasons Incumbent

Assemblymen are Out-of-Touch

HELMETTA – Long-time incumbents Patrick Diegnan and Peter Barnes are so used to raising taxes they don’t have any other ideas for New Jersey, Assembly Candidate Joe Sinagra said today in a statement.

“After over 100 tax increases, they just don’t know when to stop,” Sinagra said. “Peter Barnes has said he supports a gas tax increase. Patrick Diegnan was the primary sponsor of a gas tax increase bill. Does it ever end?”

He emphasized that the gas tax – one of the Trenton Democrats’ favorites -- leaves no person untouched.

“This affects everyone: seniors, families, individuals, small businesses. People want to be able to live and work here. People want to be able to take their children out or go visit friends. Diegnan and Barnes want to make that harder for them. There is no limit to what or who these Trenton drones are willing to tax,” he said.

Singara also highlighted the negative impact a gas tax will have on NJ businesses, “At a time when we face 9% unemployment and ‘ZERO’ job growth, Diegnan and Barnes want to force even more businesses to close their doors. This tax is a JOB KILLER, plain and simple.”

Sinagra added, “The Diegan-Barnes Team have increased payroll taxes, utility taxes and they even increased taxes on health care coverage! Not to mention that their cuts to school aid have driven property taxes through the roof.”

Everyday, people in this state have to cut back to make ends meet and, Sinagra said, it’s time Trenton did the same thing.

“Diegnan and Barnes aren’t willing to make any tough decisions to help our state. Their solution to every problem is to leech more money out of the citizens of New Jersey. It’s no wonder a record amount of residents are leaving our state every year.”

“There comes a point where enough is enough. Let’s stop taxing seniors, families, individuals, and businesses out of our state. Patrick Diegnan and Peter Barnes have sent enough people packing, maybe it’s their turn.”

###

Joe Sinagra is running for state Assembly in the 18th Legislative District which includes Edison, East Brunswick, Helmetta, Highland Park, Metuchen, South Plainfield, and South River.

The article in which Peter Barnes expresses his support can be found at the link below.

http://www.nj.com/news/local/index.ssf/2009/10/18th_district_assembly_candida.html

Patrick Diegnan’s Gas Tax Bill A1194 from the 2006-07 Legislative Session is enclosed.

New Jersey Edison 9.11 10th Years Memories

2011-09-14T14:39:00.000-04:00

I was invited to speak at this solemn event held at the Edison Hotel

New Jersey Edison 9.11 10th Years Memories

Video Title: New Jersey Edison 9.11 10th Years Memories

Saturday, Sept 11, 2011, Edison Hotel, Edison, New Jersey

http://www.icepn.com/tv/channels/news/news-express/2011/09/13/new-jersey-edison-9-11-11th-years-memories.html

America: still the best country in the world

2011-09-14T06:57:00.002-04:00

America is still the best country in the world, regardless of one might think. It is the citizens who make this nation great, when the chips are down these are the people on the front lines rolling up their shirt sleeves and getting their hands dirty. Whether they are home standing knee deep in water piling sandbags, or abroad standing on the front lines defending the freedoms that we all take for granted, it is the average individual who gets up in the morning, and see themselves looking back in the mirror that makes the difference. They are the ones who deserve the credit for making this country what it is. Fortitude, perseverance and innovation have always been the spirit of America.

It is also the people that decide how much freedom they want, not politicians. We only let government make that decision for us if “We the people” allow it. Government is supposed to act in behalf of the people as a whole, and if we as a people do not like that representation, we live in a country where a majority can change that representation.

There is much criticism about the direction of the country, whether it is on the local, state, or federal level, but we all have the freedom of choice to change that course. It is up to the people of this country to make a difference, not government.

If enough people become complacent and do not use their right to vote, some day you may lose that right. If you do not like what is happening, “We the people” have the ability to change it. “We the people” have the option to ‘allow’ government to create policy for us, or ‘make’ government represent the wishes of the people.

America is the sum population of its citizens; do not criticize America for its faults . . . You are America, do something to make it better.

~ Joe Sinagra
Candidate for NJ 18th District Assembly

Edison NJ 9/11 Tenth Anniversary: Remembrance, Renewal, Resilience Tribute

2011-09-12T09:18:00.000-04:00

As we stand here today, we can all recall the events of September 11^th, 2001 and what we were doing that day, a day that will be stamped forever in our memories.

Ten years ago today, on the morning of September 11, 2001, 19 hijackers took control   of four commercial airliners. Two crashing into the Twin Towers in New York, another into the Pentagon, and United Airlines Flight 93 near Shanksville, Pennsylvania as passengers fought their hijackers. 

That day is more than a memory for the many that lost their loved ones, it changed their lives forever. They will live the reality of those memories for the rest of their lives. 

So many died needlessly, and so many rushed toward the flames to save countless lives.

Over 400 emergency responders perished at the World Trade Center as they tried to save so many innocent victims who were human targets. Even under difficult circumstances hundreds more persisted under the most difficult, dangerous conditions with no regards to their own safety.

Who can ever forget the images that played over and over, day after day for weeks of planes flying into the world trade center, and videos of smoke billowing from the Pentagon? All of us are here today to pay our respects for what happened ten years ago, is a testament to the impact it has made upon all of us.

After the smoke cleared, it was the quietness of the aftermath that made the most impact. Along with the 3000 that perished, all of us died a little bit as we knew it would forever change our perception of US invulnerability.

But in that perception it also showed the courage of America as we stood united as one nation, undividable under God.

While dying is sad, the biggest tragedy is that life ends so soon. Remembering is what makes it difficult to say good bye.”

May God bless us all, and may we never live to see another September 11.

~ Joe Sinagra

Is America's Past a Distant Fairy Tale?

2011-08-10T07:35:00.002-04:00

Can we as a government continue with bravado knowing we just averted a calamity? What started as a drama ended up as a comedy. Nations watched night after night as the crescendo built until the final act and the curtain came down.

We have lost our credibility in the world as a nation that leads, as leaders from around the globe followed what transpired on the web and large screens across the oceans. They watched a game of politics. The posturing of a party who had two and a half years to come up with a proposed budget and ignored it, and a leader who never had a plan of his own nor offered one, ignoring the calendar as the days drew closer to needing a completed script. A leader who never once in two years said to the house and senate we need to put together a budget, it is time to do your homework. The homework turned into recess and Congress played as funds continued to be handed out like play money in a game of monopoly. A leader who wanted a budget passed and pleaded for an end to the bickering asking our overseer’s to work together. Just 72 hours before the final curtain, a leader who when finally presented with a bipartisan proposal said “no.”

Russia, China and European governments were making comments that not long ago would have been unheard of in conversation about the greatest country in the world.

We have an empire that was built off the sweat of the brows of its citizens. From the planting of the first seed on this soil this land was drenched in blood for the freedoms we enjoy today. A country our forefathers fought and died for in order to be free from the tyranny and taxation from where they came.

The game of playing politics has to stop and legislators must start thinking about the people who broke their backs to build this country. For years the promises of working hard, save your money, invest the rewards of you labor for a better life seem like a distant fairy tale. Lost jobs, lost homes and a stagnant economy seem to be more and more the new benchmark. Citizens are asked to sacrifice time and time again, and bit by bit, little by little they are giving back everything they worked for to satisfy a thirsty government that spends more than what they receive. Leaving the very people it is supposed to help in despair as they find their pockets drained of any loose change, people who can’t work harder even if they wanted to, because there just aren’t enough jobs to go around.

We can no longer afford to keep raising the deficit without making cuts because at some point in the not too distant future, there will be no further offers from anyone to carry our debt. We cannot continue to pay the interest without putting something toward the balance.

Unless our leaders realize that the time has come to make cuts, because we can no longer continue to spend borrowed funds without paying down the principal, there will come a time when our lenders will close the door on a country that once was the greatest nation of earth.

~ Joe Sinagra

.

Are we losing another family tradition?

2011-08-08T16:34:00.003-04:00

Print newspaper sales began falling before the recession began, continuing a downward spiral during the downturn and have failed to rebound ever since.

A steep drop in advertising revenue in 2008 and 2009, especially classified advertising, have taken their toll on newspapers and newspaper chains. This, coupled with a decline in circulation, have taken a toll on the printed media we depend on for up-to-date news and local events.

The economy has taken away revenue in advertising fees that many newspapers depend on. Many have filed bankruptcy for reorganization purposes, cut back on days of publication, laid off personnel, merged with other news organizations and shrunken the size of the paper, discontinuing features and reducing the amount of pages. Other papers, large and small, teeter on the brink of closing shop, and it is predicted by 2015 that many more will go by the wayside.

Others have focused less on breaking news, leaving the Internet to pursue and present the up-to-date news.

Gannett Co. owns 82 newspapers, as well as television stations, reported second-quarter profits decreased by 22 percent as circulation and print advertising declined.

The Washington Post noted that only 13 percent of Americans, or about 39 million, now buy a daily print newspaper.

At least 120 newspapers in the U.S. have shut down since January 2008, taking with them more than 21,000 jobs .

On the good side, the readership for online newspapers continues to grow. Online newspapers attracted on an average of more than 73 million visitors each month. But on the bad side, that still leaves 21,000 lost jobs in the industry.

Newspapers continue to struggle to meet challenges posed by changing reader habits, a shifting advertising market, and an anemic economy.

I remember as a kid reading the Sunday comics after coming home from church as my dad read the news. As I grew older, I read the comics less and read the news more, discussing it around dinner with the family. Will the days of families discussing the day’s events from the local newspaper be another lost tradition?

Central Jersey’s largest newspaper, without much fanfare, has again cut back on staff and the coverage of events. As newspapers continue to dwindle, getting coverage for local events through online digital media becomes somewhat difficult.

For over 200 years, newspapers have been the conventional watchdog and have been an integral part of American democracy.

As the world of online media grows, should it be considered progress?

Or is it a sign that, as the printed word disappears along with the journalists, reporters and photographers, that after 200 years it’s not just the newspapers that are in decline?

~ Joe Sinagra
18th District Congressional Candidate

When will Diegnan side with taxpayers rather than special interest unions who bankroll his campaign?

2011-07-23T10:06:00.001-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: Lily Cortese
June 23, 2011 (201) 704-8187

SilvaforAssembly@gmail.com

Sinagra and Silva accuse Diegnan of Selling his Vote Against
Bi-Partisan Pension and Benefit Reform a Decade Ago

GOP challengers ask Barnes and Diegnan the $84,000 question: When will Diegnan side taxpayers rather than special interest unions who bankroll his campaign?

SOUTH RIVER, NJ- Joe Sinagra of Helmetta and Marcia Silva of South River, the Republican candidates for New Jersey State Assembly in the 18th District, questioned Barnes and Diegnan’s impartial consideration of the bi-partisan pension and benefit reform voted on today, which will save taxpayers $122 billion over the next 30 years, in light of the $84,750* in campaign contributions they have received from public unions since 2001.

“Unfortunately we were not surprised by Barnes and Diegnan’s vote against the bi-partisan pension and benefit reform bill today,” said Sinagra, the former Council President of Helmetta. “We are still deeply disappointed in his reckless disregard for this bill which sought to fix the broken pension and health benefit system he has neglected since entering the legislature.”

Former Assistant Middlesex County Prosecutor and successful small business owner Marcia Silva added, “The struggling families and seniors in our district deserve answers to some very serious questions that have arisen due to Barnes and Diegnan’s careless vote today. The most important question of the day is why should the residents of the 18th district take Barnes and Diegnan seriously when they talk about lowering state spending and fixing our broken state?”

Patrick Diegnan has received $66,500 in contributions from public union special interests since 2001. Barnes has been the recipient of $18,250 since his first Assembly election in 2007.

“For the last decade, Diegnan has chosen to ally with special interest unions who fill his campaign coffers to make sure he stands in the way of reforms our state desperately needs”, said Sinagra.

“It’s clear that $66,500 is enough for Diegnan to share the stage with union bosses who think it’s appropriate to compare our state leaders to Nazis. It is also clear that he will oppose any effort that counteracts his failed policies that have left us with 115 new and increased taxes, 9.4% unemployment, and towering state debt that threatens the very foundation of our state government”, said Silva.

Sinagra concluded, “Struggling taxpayers and small businesses understand that the status quo Diegnan seeks to protect is not working in our state. We need leaders who will make tough decisions with a mind clear of campaign fundraising to put our state back on track.”

* Based on ELEC report filed by the campaigns of Peter Barnes and Patrick Diegnan for every cycle from the 2001 Primary to the 2011 Primary. Database of contributions available upon request.

-30-

NJEA Letter to Joe Sinagra endorsing his opponent in 2006 and Candidates response to NJEA

2011-07-22T17:45:00.002-04:00

Letter to me from the NJEA endorsing my opponent before giving

me the opportunity to speak:

My response to Joyce Powell:

Assemblyman Diegnan and Barnes vote against pension reform in lieu of $84,750 in union campaign contributions

2011-06-24T22:16:00.000-04:00

Recently, national CWA labor leader Chris Shelton in speaking to the crowd in front of the New Jersey Statehouse said “Welcome to Nazi Germany”, comparing NJ Governor Chris Christie to Adolph Hitler and Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex) as his two generals. He further stated "Any politician who stands up against collective bargaining, in this state or any other, is not a Democrat, they’re Nazis, goddamn it."

As a professional, Chris Shelton was out of line for taking the lord name's in vain, and off the mark by condemning Democrats who didn't agree with his stance into eternal damnation.

There were almost 50,000 Italian-Jews who were sent to the Nazi death camps, along with the millions of Jews who perished during the Holocaust. His remarks are offensive and should be construed as such. Many soldiers died to rid the world of the likes of Adolph Hitler, and the right for those like Shelton to spew his vitriol. For Shelton to ask the crowd “Are we ready for WWIII?” disrespects what our soldiers paid the ultimate price for. There are no similarities between the rally in Trenton and the Holocaust horrors and is an affront to all victims of Nazi crimes.

Attending that rally were Assemblymen Patrick Diegnan and Peter Barnes from the 18th District who supported Chris Shelton's platform and it showed as they voted against the bi-partisan pension and benefit reform bill, a bill that will potentially save taxpayers $122 billion over the next 30 years.

Are they for the rights and freedoms of those they profess to represent? Or do they want to continue with their "public be damned" attitude, only to serve their self interests regardless of the cost?

Is it because of the $84,750 in campaign contributions they have received from public unions since 2001 that conflicted with doing what was right for the taxpayers of the 18th district. The voters should be disappointed for their blatant disregard for this bill which sought to fix the broken pension and health benefit system which they as representatives have neglected since entering the legislature. Struggling taxpayers and small businesses understand the status quo Diegnan and Barnes seek to protect, and realize that status quo it is not working in our state.

Republicans and Democrats working together for the benefit of the people of New Jersey are refreshing. Voting partisan politics no longer works, it is time the people are represented, not special interests. Legislators need to do what they were elected for and that is to represent the people, without the fear of intimidation, name calling or being condemned into eternal damnation.

We need leaders who will make tough decisions with a mind clear of campaign fundraising to put our state back on track.

~ Joe Sinagra
18th District NJ Assembly Candidate

Press Release: Patrick Diegnan Participates in Hate-Spewing Trenton Rally

2011-06-20T20:11:00.002-04:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: CONTACT: Lily Cortese

June 20, 2011 SilvaforAssembly@gmail.com

GOP Challengers Blasts Patrick Diegnan’s Participation in Hate-Spewing Trenton Rally

Sinagra and Silva Challenge “Out of Touch” Assemblyman to Apologize

SOUTH RIVER, NJ- Joe Sinagra of Helmetta and Marcia Silva of South River, the Republican candidates for New Jersey State Assembly in the 18th District, rebuked Assembly member Patrick Diegnan for his participation in a Trenton rally on Thursday where CWA vice president Chris Shelton compared Governor Chris Christie to Adolf Hitler and referred to the Democratic Senate President Steve Sweeney as a Nazi General.

“This kind of hateful language has no place in our political discourse,” said Silva, a former assistant prosecutor for Middlesex County and currently an attorney in private practice. “These types of statements trivialize the Holocaust and are an affront to all victims of Nazi atrocities. Patrick Diegnan should denounce these statements immediately and issue an apology to his constituents.”

Silva added, “I am encouraged by the courageous steps taken by the Democratic leaders of our legislature to work in a bi-partisan fashion with the Governor to reform our enormous public-sector liabilities in order to provide real health and retirement security as opposed to unfunded promises that cannot be fulfilled. We owe it to our committed public sector employees to fix these programs.”

“Assemblyman Diegnan, who collects at least $99,800 [1] from three public sector jobs, is simply out-of-touch with the issues that matter to voters in the 18^th District. Rather than work to reform bankrupt state programs in order to lower the tax burden and increase employment opportunities for all New Jerseyans, he protests angrily to maintain the broken status quo. While this might work for him personally, it is not working for most voters in the 18^th District”, said former Helmetta Council President Joe Sinagra.

Sinagra concluded, “It is simply time to replace Patrick Diegnan. We cannot afford his approach to government any longer.”

###

[1] Star-Ledger June 1, 2011

Press Release: NJ Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan holds multiple public jobs

2011-06-18T07:12:00.001-04:00

For Immediate Release: Contact: Lily Cortese

June 2, 2010 silvaforassembly@gmail.com

Joe Sinagra and Marcia Silva Vow to End Practice of Taxpayer Subsidized Pay Days for Politicians

GOP Candidates question how Deputy Speaker of the Assembly Patrick Diegnan - who has amassed multiple public jobs - can claim that he represents the working class residents who subsidize his paychecks

Edison, NJ- Responding to a Star-Ledger article outlining that Trenton Democrat Patrick Diegnan makes a yearly income of at least $99,800[1] from his three taxpayer funded jobs, former Helmetta Council President Joe Sinagra and former prosecutor and successful small business owner Marcia Silva, the GOP candidates for State Assembly in the 18^th Legislative District, are calling for an outright ban on politicians receiving multiple public paychecks and pensions.

According to the article, Patrick Diegnan is among 11 members of the Assembly that receive over $50,000 a year in taxpayer funded salaries on top of their annual legislative salaries of $49,000.

“Too many families in the 18^th district have seen a loved one lose their job and are making difficult decisions regarding their personal finances while Assemblyman Diegnan collects three public salaries”, stated Sinagra. “There is a dangerous disconnect between Diegnan whose part time public jobs alone account for a better pay day than many of the taxpayers who subsidize it.”

Holding multiple positions as a public employee or an elected official leaves room for “Conflict of Interests”, “Conflict of Obligations” and public mistrust.

Marcia Silva added, “Diegnan has not opposed one of the 115 new or increased taxes that have come before him in the Legislature. He has no problem voting to make taxpayers that face an affordability crisis in New Jersey while he collects paychecks from three taxpayer funded jobs. His yearly public payout is yet another insult to the working class families he has taken an oath to represent. The hard working taxpayers of the 18^th district can no longer afford people like Patrick Diegnan in the legislature.”

“Voters will be given the opportunity to cut Diegnan’s taxpayer salary in half on November 8^th by voting him out of office”, concluded Silva.

###

[1] Patrick Diegnan receives a $49,000 annual salary as Assemblyman, at least $40,800 annually as the attorney for the Middlesex County Joint Insurance Fund, and at least $10,000 annually as the municipal attorney for Spotswood.

Is America in Decline?

2011-06-12T10:32:00.003-04:00

The official unemployment rate went up to 9.1 percent, as millions of Americans are unable to provide for their families, 45.1 percent of all unemployed Americans have been out of work for at least six months. Two years ago, the number of "long-term unemployed" in the United States was only 2.6 million, now up to 6.2 million.

The United States has lost an average of 50,000 manufacturing jobs per month since China joined the (WTO) World Trade Organization in 2001. The U.S. trade deficit with China is now 27 times larger than it was back in 1990.

The number of "middle class jobs" is about 10 percent lower than a decade ago. The number of "low income jobs" in the U.S. has risen steadily over the past 30 years, accounting for 41 percent of all jobs in the United States. Only 66.8% of American men had a job last year, the lowest level ever been recorded in all of U.S. history.

College tuition in the United States has gone up by over 900 percent since 1978.

U.S. home prices have fallen 33 percent since the peak of the housing bubble, with 28 percent in negative equity. Over one million U.S. families lost their homes to foreclosure in a single year during 2010. New home sales in the United States are down 80% from the peak in July 2005.

The cost of food and the cost of energy have risen at a rate of 17 percent over the past six months. The majority of wages for those working haven’t gone up 17%, and certainly not for new job hires making less than previous earnings.

Over the past 12 months the average price of gasoline in the United States has gone up averaging about 30%. The average price of a gallon of gasoline in the United States was $1.83 in 2009, today it is $3.77. Oil companies will bring in about $200 billion in pre-tax profits this year, while receiving about $4.4 billion in specialized tax breaks from the U.S. government

Because of the economy, 32 percent of Americans have put off doctor visits, delayed preventive care, or have stopped taking medication to save money. But in the long term will only place a burden on health care as it only creates long-term health consequences.

Once Obamacare is fully implemented in 2014, 30 percent of all U.S. employers will "definitely or probably" quit offering employer-sponsored health coverage.

Americans now enrolled in at least one anti-poverty program run by the federal government are one out of six.

In 2007, there were about 26 million Americans on food stamps. Today, there are over 44 million on food stamps, with one out of every four American children on food stamps.

The U.S. federal government incurred $5.3 trillion in new debt during 2010, on top of the $61.6 trillion financial obligations not been paid for yet.

Americans think of the federal government when you mention”government debt”, but it is not just the federal government that has an enormous debt problem. State and local government debt has reached an all-time high of 22 percent.

The majority of Americans don't understand that the Federal Reserve and the debt-based monetary system that it runs are the nucleus of our economic problems. All of this debt is will eventually crush and bury us like a ton of bricks. The U.S. government spent over 413 billion dollars on interest on the national debt during fiscal 2010, and it is being projected that the U.S. government will be shelling out 900 billion dollars just in interest on the national debt by the year 2019.

Raising the debt ceiling and going into even more debt we are destroying the economic future of our children and our grandchildren. All it does is buy more time before the unavoidable collision course that is being set.

The stimulus didn’t work, the money has run out, and it only helped foster a temporary fairy tale economy. There is no economic recovery and may have even prolonged it by creatng a false economy, and though many still believe we are in a recession, as a nation we are heading full steam into a depression much worse than ever seen before.

The good jobs continue to decline and the number of Americans losing their homes continues to go up. People are having a much more difficult time paying their bills and our federal government is drowning in debt.

If the hiring to fill 64,000 jobs at McDonald’s is an indication of our new economy, things are about to get a lot worse.

Millions more of American families are about to lose their jobs and their homes as the U.S. economy continues to fall apart.

Government doesn’t ‘need’ to; it ‘must’ operate more efficiently and spend less than it ever has before.

~ Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

The Democrat Years - A Record of Tax and Spend

2011-06-10T08:41:00.001-04:00

Over eight years of Democrat oversight and New Jersey is no better off now than it was before, and probably even worse off.

The ten-year period between 1992 and 2002 the Republican-controlled Legislature reduced the tax burden of New Jersey residents no less than 62 times by including a 30% reduction in gross income tax rates and a rollback of the sales tax from seven to six percent.

New Jersey’s actual revenue for 1998, $17.2 billion, was greater than spending of $16.4 billion. The reverse was true for 2008, where spending was $33.3 billion, greater than the reoccurring state budget revenue of $32 billion.

Revenue from the state’s 2008 income tax increased 121 percent since 1998, 39 percent of total state revenue. Up considerably from1998 when the income tax paid for about one-third of state spending.

Sales tax revenue increased 84 percent, supporting about 28 percent of the state’s budget, as it did in1998. In the fall of 2006, the state’s sales tax was increased from 6% to 7% and expanded to cover additional goods and services. For 2008, sales tax revenue was projected to generate $1.9 billion more revenue than in 2006 and $4 billion more than 1998.

Taxes, fees and state revenue sources had increased by 58 percent or $4 billion, supporting 34 percent of the state’s budget, as compared to 40 percent in 1998.

Revenue tax had increased by 82 percent on the corporation and bank tax, and the “Realty Transfer Tax” increased 500 percent since 1998. The state received an increase of 82% from all other taxes and fees since 1998, generating a total of $4.3 billion more in revenue in 2008.

With all of this additional revenue, you would think New Jersey would be up to its eyeballs in profits. But through mismanagement the increased revenue has only added to our debt, as unaccounted spending was rampant.

To the Democrats, a tax reduction meant a loss of revenue. In 2004 former Governor McGreevey admitted that “tax cuts enacted during the [10 years of Republican control] lowered state revenues by $1.8 billion for this year alone.”

Governor Corzine and a Democrat-controlled Legislature were unwilling to reduce spending to meet recurring revenue so they did what Democrats in New Jersey always do – they raised taxes.

From 2002 through 2008 Democrats imposed 115 new taxes and tax increases. During this period there were five cigarette tax increases, four increases in realty transfer taxes, four health tax changes, and a new car rental tax with a subsequent increase.

The Democrat-controlled Legislature continued to increase revenue on income, sales and corporation business taxes.

In 2002 the McGreevey Administration and Democrat-controlled Legislature restructured the Corporation Business Tax in its mandate to raise an additional $1 billion from the business community.

In addition to the increased corporation business tax liability imposed in 2002, it now required a business to pay a surcharge equal to 4% of the amount of the corporation’s tax liability.

This legislation increased the corporation business tax minimum payment for taxpayers with New Jersey gross receipts of $100,000 or more. The new minimum tax ranges from $500 to $2,000.

The federal government granted business tax breaks in 2003 as part of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act and again in 2009 as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Democrat-controlled Legislature decided that New Jersey businesses should not be given certain of the tax breaks granted by the federal government and disallowed the depreciation deduction and the manufacturer tax deduction, as well as the deferral of the taxable income generated from the repurchase of certain kinds of debt.

Income tax rates were increased in 2004 in order to provide one year of increased direct property tax relief. After that first year, the increased revenue was diverted for other purposes and was again increased January 2009 through the creation of two new marginal rates and the increase of a third.

In 2009 businesses were hit with another mandate which had the same impact as a tax increase. According to an article in the Wall Street Journal on June 20, 2007, the federal Department of Labor estimates that paid family leave programs cost employers an average of $1.76 per hour per full-time employee, or 6.8% of total compensation. A company with ten full-time employees saw an average increase in costs of approximately $36,608.

Also, the elimination of the property tax deduction in 2009 actually caused certain homeowners to pay income tax on their property taxes.

The sales tax was increased from 6% to 7% on July 1, 2006. Democrats chose to raise this tax only for the reasoning that it had not been increased during the previous five years, and raising taxes is an easier alternative for Democrats than cutting spending.

In October of 2006 the following became subject to the sales tax including dry cleaning of non-clothing items; landscaping; self-storage rental units; tanning and tattoo services; massages; information services; limousine services; flooring and carpet installation; parking, storing and garaging a motor vehicle; non-subscription magazines and periodicals; investigative and security services; and membership fees. Membership fees included charges by health clubs, gyms, golf clubs, and YMCAs.

One-half of the tax increase is constitutionally dedicated to property tax relief. During fiscal years 2007 and 2008 the other half of the tax increase was used to pay for legislative additions (pork) to the budget.

The new increases were estimated to yield the state on New Jersey $1.3 billion in new revenue, meaning that state residents paid out their pockets the same $1.3 billion to purchase necessary goods and services.

Democrats like to talk about the affordability and accessibility of health insurance in New Jersey. They appropriated millions of dollars to provide health insurance to low and moderate income state residents through the Family Care program, while at the same time imposing new taxes on health insurance providers. All this did was to pass the cost on to the policyholders, making insurance even less affordable. As part of the 2006 budget, two tax changes were approved that led to higher premiums.

The Democrats also could have passed the millionaires tax which they choose not to impose during this time, which will not make a dent in paying down the debt. Now during a time of lost jobs, high unemployment, and a market of foreclosed homes they want to raise the gasoline tax by 24 cents, at a time when New Jersey taxpayers can afford it the least.

With 115 tax increase, you would think the state would have brought in enough revenue to bring us financial stability by now. Years of waste and mismanagement are the reasons the state is in the dire financial mess it is today.

A struggling state economy combined with excessive taxes, unchecked regulations, and rampant spending have made New Jersey unaffordable to middle class families and our seniors who live on fixed incomes.

Democrat legislation also eliminated the ability of seniors with an income of $100,000 or more to exclude their pension and retirement income when paying New Jersey income tax. Democrats called seniors impacted by this legislation “high income taxpayers.”

Government doesn’t ‘need’ to; it ‘must’ operate more efficiently and spend less than it ever has before.

Just for the record our opponents voted for 114 of those increases.

Many of our politicians have forgotten why they were elected and are more concerned about holding office, and while successful at winning elections, they have failed New Jersey.

~ Joe Sinagra

A Liberal About Face . . . Now that the War on Terror is Popular

2011-05-06T07:19:00.001-04:00

The hunt for bin Laden due to the Sept. 11 attacks were a defining moment for then President Bush, spanning the rest of his presidency.

On October 7, 2001 he said, "We will not waver; we will not tire; we will not falter; and we will not fail."

The 9/11 Commission concluded that al-Qaeda was clearly in Iraq and responsible for deadly bombings, on September 11th, 2001.

In 2006 Pelosi didn’t think that al Qaeda was active in Iraq. When she was asked by a reporter “President Bush today blamed the surge of violence in Iraq on al Qaeda,” incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded with an incoherent answer about how “the 9/11 Commission dismissed that notion a long time ago and I feel sad that the President is resorting to it again."

Wow, have times changed! Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi now calls the killing a “significant development in OUR fight against Al Qaeda.” Now it is OUR fight? Is it a significant development because its campaign season?

Attack, after attack, after relentless attack on then President George Bush, the same Democrats and media are now gloating over the death of Osama Bin Laden, under the watch of Commander in Chief Obama.

Despite the well known fact that Iraq was the only central front in the war against international terror, Democrats saw Iraq as completely unrelated to the war on terror. Democrats claimed that Bush failed in the war against international terror as Bin Laden was at large and Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong place and the wrong time and it can’t be won. The Democrat plan for the war on terror was retreat.

The Middle East began to fall apart under Jimmy Carter over thirty years ago, left to bloom into an international threat with global ramifications under Bill Clinton. China, North Korea, Iraq and Iran became more dangerous throughout the 1990’s. In January of 2001, eight months into a new administration George W. Bush walked into the lion’s den with the events of 9/11.

As the National Security Agency intercepted intercontinental communications between terror cells which ultimately led to the arrests of a UK terror cell that had planned to blow up a dozen planes in route to the US, Democrats were busy pursuing a partisan court ruling to stop those intelligence operations.

As the Central Intelligence Agency interrogated captured terrorists around the globe seeking information to help prevent the next 9/11, Democrats were too busy attacking the CIA for allegedly torturing known terrorist’s committed to killing more innocent people.

Democrats turned the other cheek when it was popular to bash Bush; now that Osama is gone they want to take credit for the war on terror and finding a known terrorist.There cannot be any closure; it is not the end of terrorism. In fact it may only have made matters worse, and now more than ever we need to heighten National Security and become more diligent than ever in protecting the borders of United States.The war against terror is not over as Al Qaeda will still target Americans. Even with the demise of Osama Bin Laden, let us not forget who attacked our people here at home, causing the deaths of 3,100 innocent civilians.

This isn’t about politics; it’s about national security, and protecting the live of Americans. Terrorists kill Americans; they don't choose Republicans or Democrats.

Psst . . They don't really care who wins the election.

~ Joe Sinagra

I ask Senate President Steve Sweeney . . . Who cared in the ten years the Democrats were in control?

2011-04-28T07:39:00.002-04:00

Gov. Christie and Senate President Steve Sweeney have traded barbs as Christie assailed the "do nothing legislature." Sweeney tells Christie save the tough talk for somebody who cares.

OK Steve . . . before Chris Chrisite, who really cared? Was it the State Senate or the State Assembly that stood up for the pockets of the taxpayers? Two administrations of pork spending and raising taxes to the levels it is at today. Actually 3, if you throw in Florio. Whether you like Christie or not, agree with his policies or not, he is doing what he promised when he when he ran for election, he said “I will not raise Taxes.” He didn’t wait a few months like his predecessor and announce, “Oops” I made a mistake.

Neither McGreevy nor Corzine attempted to reign in taxes. A Democrat controlled legislature for over 8 years, had 115 separate tax increases, and now they are indignant over Christie who has been in office for a short time. What did the Democrats do about all the private sector jobs lost during that time?

State spending and tax revenues climbed more than twice the rate of inflation from 1980 to 1990. State-government employment had outpaced population growth. The U.S. population grew in the 1980's by 10 percent, as state employment grew by almost 30 percent.

A study by the American Legislative Exchange Council showed that state-government pay grew at a faster pace than private-sector pay. For every dollar increase in compensation received by private-sector workers, state-government workers received $6.30.

Both 1990 and 1991 were record tax increase years for New Jersey, while expenditures surged, and no reduction in spending. In 1991 state spending rose by 10 percent and in 1992 it grew by 12 percent. In 1992 alone spending rose 26.0 percent in New Jersey.

Bottom line is that Florio, McGreevy, and Corzine were governors who tried to fight budget deficits with major tax increases. All it did was hurt the state’s economy and did little to put on cork on the flowing bottle of red ink.

After pledging no new taxes, (where have I heard that before… was it Corzine?) Florio shoved and ram-rodded through the legislature a "bilk the rich" $2.8-billion tax hike to bestow a massive infusion of funds to the inner-city schools. Immediately sinking the economy into a deeper into recession, while business bankruptcies increased by 150 percent, 300,000 jobs were lost, and the unemployment rate rocketed to 9.1 percent--the highest in the nation. Governor Florio declared that his tax hike was an unavoidable dose of bitter medicine to balance the budget. The truth of the matter is that Florio was among the three biggest spending governors in the nation. In 1991 the budget grew by 8.4 percent; that increase was followed by a 1992 budget expansion of 26.1 percent (the third largest in the nation). In his first two years the budget grew by more than $3,000 per family.

Corzine picked up the baton and continued the tradition, and now the Democrats want to point the finger and switch the woes of the state on a Governor who took office on January 19, 2010. After a year and 4 months, the state’s problems are now the fault of Chris Christie.

Florio lied along with Corzine when they said they wouldn’t raise taxes, and now the Democrat legislature is doing whatever they can to force Christie to renege on his promise of not raising taxes.

I ask Sweeney . . . who cared in the ten years the Democrats were in control?

Obamanomics and the Pea

2011-04-17T21:11:00.000-04:00

Obama will push Congress to raise the limit on the national debt, permitting the government to borrow more to meet its financial obligations. Now he wants to raise taxes on top of that, so more can be collected to pay down the previous deficit he created. Obamanomics = Problem solved . . . it’s only a matter of time before we dig ourselves into another hole playing catch-up, and the root of the problems remain.

The raising of taxes will only go towards paying down the old debt, while the new debt climbs to new heights. By Obama saying he will tax the rich is sort of like the game of "thimblerig" keeping your eye on the pea, while the shells are being shuffled around. In Taxing the rich there is no pea under the shell, it only creates the illusion that something is being done.

Failure to raise our debt ceiling only means the Treasury cannot borrow more money; it isn’t the end of the world. By forcing government to limit spending it will increase its proceeds.

Defaulting on our creditors and refusal to pay interest on our debt is not caused by a failure to raise the debt ceiling. The federal government collects over $2 trillion in annual tax revenue, which is much much higher than what we pay in interest.

What politicians are saying is they would rather default on our creditors than cut their precious spending and upset special interest groups. They are saying that votes are more important than the “full faith and credit of the United States”.

It is nothing more than a threat to avoid making the hard decision; the reality is no one wants to do anything about it. To do otherwise, would mean losing those votes.

Like you or I, we must live within our means or suffer the consequences. Government is no different and the $2 trillion it collects in taxes is no small chicken feed.

Even if the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy were allowed to expire, the federal government would have only raked in an extra $40 billion this year, quite a ways off from eradicating the $1.6 trillion dollar budget deficit the Obama administration will rack up this year.

By Obama extending the Bush tax cuts for two years the federal government will take in roughly $81.5 billion less from those making over $250k, but $463 billion less from those making less than $250k.

Even if Obama not extended the Bush tax cuts and taxed the rich, his deficit for this year would have still been over $1.3 trillion. The taxing the rich cry is a diversion and another intrusion on class warfare.

Bottom line is the federal government has a spending problem . . . not a revenue problem. This year alone spending is over double what was spent in any year prior to 2005 and the national debt has increased 300% since 2007. By not controlling spending taxes will only continue to climb higher. Once all the rich are taxed where do we go to pay down the next deficit?

If we do not face the problem head on, sooner or later the problem will come to us. To paraphrase an old saying . . . “ If we do not change direction, we may end up where we are heading.”

College Education not Always Worth it

2011-03-16T06:51:00.002-04:00

In today's economy there is no guarantee college graduates will come close to getting a job in their field. They get the hype if you go to school for a certain field you can make a certain amount of money, but if 15,000 kids take the classes for a certain field, there may only be 1,500 jobs throughout the country that are hiring and not everyone will get the job, leaving them to pursue other fields at lower pay and still have a huge debt to carry.

As of February 2011 those with some college or associate degree were at 7.8 percent unemployed, while those with a bachelor's degree rated somewhat better percentage at 4.3 percent.

More than 17 million Americans with college degrees are doing jobs that the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) says require less than the skill levels associated with a bachelor's degree giving us a higher educated, lowering paying workforce. In the United States today, there are 317,000 restaurant wait staff, 365,000 cashiers, 18,000 parking lot attendants and 24.5 percent of retail salespersons, all who have college degrees.

Many leave college either for health or financial reasons, but that does not wipe out the debt occurred while they were going.

Thousands go into areas they love but do not consider the possible scarcity of jobs, without calculating whether, if they do get a job, what they will earn will be enough to comfortably pay on what they will owe.

Many unemployed college grads face the additional burden of student loan payments. Thousands upon thousands of others owe more than they earn in a year and have yet to see the value of their education. Those with graduate or professional degrees owe student debt ranging from $30,000 to $120,000.

There are some forgiveness possibilities that include service in volunteer, non-profit organizations, working as a teacher for low-income schools and a wide variety of other put-your-life-on-hold jobs, but may be outside a student's field of study.

Few would argue that college is a bad investment, but the economic downturn could diminish the value of that investment.

Those who graduate during a recession tend to start at smaller and lower-paying companies or firms, which forces them to change jobs more frequently than those who graduated during better times.

College financial aid specialists recommend students should take a long and hard look at the average salaries in their chosen profession before taking out student loans.

Currently, our economy is facing the biggest student loan debt bubble in the history of the world, and when new college graduates enter the "real world" they are finding out that the good jobs they were promised are few and far between.

There was a commercial that showed a man with a great family, a four-bedroom house in a great community, a new car, who belonged to the local golf club, and he says, "How do I do it? I'm in debt up to my eyeballs."

College should be worth the price of an education, but in today's market it should be approached like any other investment - with caution.

~ Joe Sinagra

Let Them Eat Cake

2011-02-21T13:34:00.001-05:00

After appealing to Americans to sacrifice their holidays President Obama has been accused of having double standards days before his wife and children went on a costly skiing trip being flown there on Air Force Two.While there the family stayed at the upscale Sebastian Hotel on Vail Mountain, where rooms start at $650 a night and range up to more than $2,400 for multi-bedroom suites.

A local newspaper reported that the first lady went to Restaurant Kelly Liken and dined on braised ribs.

Normally to most Americans this would not be a big deal, but the trip came just days after the President tried to sell his cost-cutting budget to the American people by asking them to stay at home.

Right after stating, “Just like every family in America, the federal government has to do two things at once. It has to live within its means while still investing in the future. If you’re a family trying to cut back, you might skip going out to dinner, you might put off a vacation,” Michelle zipped up her bags, was driven to the tarmac with the kids and flew to Vail on Air Force Two. But in actuality it is Air Force One, it is known as Air Force One only when the President is aboard, which costs around $181,757 per hour.

A motorcade of about a dozen vehicles, including at least 15 police officers, travelled from Eagle County Regional Airport to Vail on Friday night when the presidential party arrived.

Even though Mr. Obama stayed at the White House, the rest of his family headed to Colorado –rather than visiting slopes closer to Washington in Virginia or Pennsylvania, despite previous criticisms over the family's extravagant vacations, including a trip last summer to Spain.

Mrs. Obama also raised eyebrows when she left earlier than her husband for their annual Christmas holiday in Hawaii, incurring additional expenses estimated to be more than $97,000.

In August it cost taxpayers an alleged $375,000 for her security detail - and two flights on Air Force One - on a holiday to Spain with her daughter, Sasha, and 40 friends.
Although the Obama’s will pay for a portion of the skiing trip, taxpayers will still shoulder many of the costs.

As the majority of Americans sit by their kitchen table deciding which bill to pay, dining on macaroni while being told do as I say, not as I do, the first lady of the health police dined on ribs.

Michelle had said “Not too many places in this country you can do that and still be at the seat of power”.

Could that also be interpreted as “Let them eat cake?

~ Joe Sinagra

Eminent Domain and Atlantic City Revitalization

2010-11-22T11:17:00.003-05:00

In 1976 residents voted for casino gambling in Atlantic City. In doing so the idea was to revitalize a depressed city with substandard housing and double-digit unemployment. Even though current casino profits are down, in 2009 11 casinos brought in over $3.9 billion in revenue.

Double digit unemployment continues, and dilapidated housing is still second-rate for many citizens. The majority of residents and businesses have not seen any change in their communities. Urban decay surrounding the casinos has not improved, and many residents who thought in 1976 they would see neighborhood improvements aren't happy. Taxes are not lower, the streets are not any cleaner, and neighborhood security has not improved much. Many local businesses have closed or been boarded up as casino stores compete against them.

Senate President Sweeney said, “We have to recognize that Atlantic City’s gaming and tourism attractions have a bigger impact than inside the city borders, if we’re serious about turning Atlantic City’s casinos into a resort destination, we have to separate the problems plaguing the casino district from the problems facing the entire city.

So in essence, the revenue of the state comes above the needs of the people, even though very little casino revenue went towards improving the surrounding communities?

In 35 years, many of them pre-recession years, the benefits of that revenue still hasn’t filtered down to the surrounding communities as promised.

In gambling with a bailout of the gaming industry, will those residents be cheated once again with the threat of Eminent Domain under the guise of revitalization that will take away the remainder of little they have left?

~ Joe Sinagra

NJEA should take hit for grant loss

2010-09-16T07:25:00.001-04:00

New Jersey lost the Race to the Top education grant
by 4.8 points.

Gov. Christie took shots at the President and the
federal government, with the Democrat fangs waiting
in the wings drooling over the opportunity to draw
blood.

Education Commissioner Bret Schundler supplied
figures for 2010 and 2011, when the question
specifically asked for data from 2008 and 2009.
This was the reason that supposedly cost the state
of New Jersey the loss of $400 million.

The New Jersey Education Association partied in the
streets, the next morning, Schundler was fired.

The rationale of why he was fired is another matter.
The real issue at hand is why the NJEA is not being
held accountable.

A major prerequisite of the program required the
endorsement of the districts and the endorsement of
the unions — and only four out of 591 districts
signed. The NJEA claimed that they did not have a
chance to review the application over the holiday
weekend and wouldn't sign on to the program
unless it was submitted as they had previously
agreed upon with Schundler. This latter agreement
clearly did not meet the terms of the program nor
those of the Christie administration, and New Jersey
failed miserably in the first phase of the
competition.

However, four districts of the NJEA had affixed their
signatures to the Christie version of the application,
along with 289 of the 591 school districts.

The application has a section on the endorsement of
parties involved, which include the NJEA, the school
districts, and the state Department of Education.
Since the NJEA did not essentially approve, and the
reviewers clearly state that only 1 percent of the
unions had agreed to the proposal, the reviewers
took off 15-20 points.

Then there is another section on implementation
and how they will make it work. Since the union
would not agree to the application, the reviewers
say that this would hinder the implementation of the
plan, deducting an additional 15-20 points.

"While much of the New Jersey proposal is strong,
one important fact makes it unlikely to succeed," one
reviewer wrote. "Forty nine percent of the state's
LEAs will not participate in this proposal. That is a
significant number and ... New Jersey will find it
difficult to implement even successful elements of
its RTTT (Race to the Top) proposals."

The lack of the union's endorsement alone cost the
state 14 points on the scale.

The reviewers of the application state on the reviews
that the NJEA had cost New Jersey 30-40 points on
the application. Yet, the NJEA was dancing like a cat
on a hot tin roof over a missed five-point question.

The investigation should be over why the NJEA lost
the grant, not the less than five points lost by the
incorrect information supplied by Schundler.

NJEA President Barbara Keshishian, owes the people
of New Jersey an explanation for why this
application failed, not Christie.

~ Joe Sinagra

NJEA . . . The Race to the Bottom

2010-08-30T23:00:00.004-04:00

By clicking on the above headline you can view the New Jersey Application #3550NJ-4

NJEA . . . The Race to the Bottom
by Joe Sinagra on Monday, August 30, 2010
New Jersey lost the Race to the Top education grant by 4.8 points.

Governor Christie took shots at the President and the Federal Government, with the Democrat fangs waiting in the wings drooling over the opportunity to draw blood.

Education Commissioner Bret Schundler supplied figures for 2010 and 2011, when the question specifically asked for data from 2008 and 2009. This was the reason that supposedly cost the state of New Jersey the loss of $400 million.

The New Jersey Education Association partied in the streets, the next morning, Schundler was fired.

The rationale of why he was fired is another matter. The real issue at hand is why the NJEA is not being held accountable.

A major perquisite of the program required the endorsement of the districts and the endorsement of the unions, out of which only 4 out of 591 districts, signed. The NJEA claimed that they did not have a chance to review the application over the holiday weekend and wouldn’t sign on to the program, unless it was submitted as they had previously agreed upon with Schundler. This latter agreement clearly did not meet the terms of the program nor those of the Christie administration, and NJ failed miserably in the first phase of the competition. However, 4 districts of the NJEA had affixed their signatures to the Christie version of the application, along with 289 of the 591 school districts.

The application has a section on the endorsement of parties involved, which include the NJEA, the school districts, and the NJDOE. Since the NJEA did not essentially approve, and the reviewers clearly state that only 1% of the unions had agreed to the proposal, the reviewers took off 15-20 points.

Then there is another section on implementation and how they will make it work. Since the union would not agree to the application, the reviewers say that this would hinder the implementation of the plan, deducting further additional 15-20 points.

The reviewers of the application state on the reviews, that the NJEA had cost New Jersey 30-40 points on the application. Yet, the NJEA was dancing like a cat on a hot tin roof over a missed 5-point question.

The investigation should be over why the NJEA lost the grant, not the less than 5 points lost by the incorrect information supplied by Schundler.

"While much of the New Jersey proposal is strong, one important fact makes it unlikely to succeed," one reviewer wrote. "Forty nine percent of the state's LEAs will not participate in this proposal. That is a significant number and ... New Jersey will find it difficult to implement even successful elements of its RTTT (Race to the Top) proposals."

The lack of the union's endorsement alone cost the state 14 points on the scale.

NJEA President Barbara Keshishian, owes the people of New Jersey an explanation for why this application failed, not Christie.

View Application: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/phase2-applications/comments/new-jersey.pdf

Unemployment rates show no sign of decrease

2010-08-16T21:10:00.001-04:00

There are many who criticize the unemployed for not trying to find work and accuse them of living off the system. Not since the 1930’s has the US has seen a recession this great.

I consider myself fortunate enough to work for a great company, but there are many who are not so lucky.

Those who make comments such as,”they aren’t looking hard enough”, or “if they really wanted work they would have found something by now”, are either still employed or living in a vacuum. Ask anyone out of work if they enjoy collecting their “earned” benefits.

Jobs lost in the past few years will be not be coming back. Many U.S. jobs have, or will continue to move overseas or be replaced by technology. Those jobs that do come back are not going to be hiring at previous salaries as the jobs of the next decade do not look rewarding. As an example, the number of home health aides is expected to expand by 461,000. But their median earnings come to just $20,460 — well below the median U.S. wage of $32,390. Also, future benefit packages that were expected from employers will not be as lucrative and top paying jobs of the future will be minimal. Bio-medical engineers, as an example, will account for just 12,000 of the more than 15 million new jobs expected to emerge through 2018.

The job market is grim, and the economy does not look like it will explode anytime soon. Many have lost their benefits, still looking, or just gave up. Anyone previously making $40,000 a year or more certainly does not want to live off the system, especially those with families, mortgages and car payments.

They will hold on to what little they have, they cannot afford to save, and they won’t have anything extra to spend. Consumer spending, which fuels economic and job growth, is likely to remain weak for a long time to come.

The US lost an additional 131,000 jobs in July as the unemployment rate were predicted to go to 9.6%, and held firm at 9.5 %, as 652,000 people abandoned their job searches.. The Bureau for Labor Statistics revised its figures for June downwards, reporting that 221,000 jobs had been lost compared to its original estimate of 125,000.

Even though the U.S. economy added an average of less than 100,000 jobs a month in the first seven months of 2010, it still wasn’t enough to bring unemployment down.

New Jersey lost 245,400 private-sector jobs, a 7.1 percent decline, according to the NJ Department of Labor, between February 2008, at the start of this employment recession, and January of this year, an average monthly loss of 10,225 jobs over the 24-month period. At that rate it could take a decade for the state to reclaim the nearly 250,000 private-sector jobs it has lost over the past two years.

If New Jersey adds about 30,000 jobs per year starting in 2012, it would take until 2019, to reclaim all of the private-sector jobs lost to date and to regain the last private-sector employment peak of 3.44 million jobs, set in January 2008.

Bill Cheney, chief economist at John Hancock Financial Services in Boston said, “If we don’t see significant job growth by the end of the year, the US economy could be in serious trouble.”

Until Americans know that they will not lose their job because their company is in trouble and start feeling a sense of security, there is no way that their outlook on the economy will turn around, regardless of what economists may say.

Even if the job market held at a steady pace, without consumer confidence the market will stay stagnant.

~ Joe Sinagra

What is a jobless recovery?

2010-07-31T09:37:00.001-04:00

A jobless recovery is when companies still maintain or gain large profits with less people.

In 2009, Fortune 500 companies tripled their profits by $391 billion, and reduced their payrolls by eliminating over 800,000 jobs. The company is doing great, to the people that were laid off it is another story. New Jersey, as of June had 17,100 fewer people in the labor force, and last month we lost another 1,900 jobs.

Another factor stagnating job growth is high taxes. A study by the Center on Wealth and Philanthropy suggests that states that target the rich for tax hikes may pay a stiff price. New Jersey alone suffered a $70 billion loss in wealth from 2004 through 2008, as many businesses left for greener pastures. The dilemma we face is not only that the wealthy are leaving; the bigger problem is that we can’t get anyone to move here. There have been a larger percentage of wealthy households leaving, than those entering the state.

State tax hikes would hit the wealthy exceptionally hard if President Barack Obama gets his way. For 20011, the Obama administration proposes to allow the Bush tax cuts for those earning more than $250,000 to expire and reducing the value of deductions (including for state and local taxes) for those earning $250,000 plus. Also, some of the upper-middle- class will lose all the advantages of state and local income tax deductions to the alternative minimum tax.

With the private sector generating little tax revenue and with a newly enacted 2 percent cap on property tax increases, the public sector will encounter more pain.

Until we have substantial job growth, incentives to entice companies back into the state, or innovative ways to keep companies from leaving, without an economic recovery, the state will continue to have a budget deficit.

As long as the state has a deficit it will raise taxes eventually on those who no longer have the means to pay.

You may have a jobless recovery, but not an economic one.

~ Joe Sinagra

America Loves Crackers!

2010-07-10T15:07:00.000-04:00

Crackers come in many shapes and sizes.

The life of the cracker came in 1801 when Massachusetts baker, Josiah Bent, burnt a batch of biscuits in his brick oven. The crackling noise given off from the charred biscuits inspired the name – crackers.

There is the prize in Cracker Jacks; the restaurant chain Cracker Barrel, the combination of ‘LSD’ Talwin and Ritalin is known as crackers, cracker jacks is a reference to Crack smokers.

There are burnt crackers, (Hindus celebrate Lord Rama during Diwiali with burnt crackers), animal crackers, fire crackers, graham crackers, the Cork and Cracker in Indianapolis,The Florida Cracker Trail, The Florida Cracker Horse, The Milwaukee Braves were once known as the “Atlanta Crackers”, The “Atlanta Black Crackers” was a professional baseball team which played in the Atlanta Negro League, Brooke is the name of the female goldfish for Goldfish Crackers, in Scandinavia there is cracker bread, Kentucky is the Corn-Cracker state, the Red-Cracker butterfly, Jumping Cracker Beans Llc in San Jose California, Cracker Neck Virginia, graham cracker bananas, and Mary's Gone Crackers, Inc. in Gridley, Ca. . . Phew!

The weakened economy continues to affect the baking industry, although in the case of crackers, it's had a surprisingly positive effect.

Michael Morrissey, brand public relations manager, Kellogg's, Battle Creek, Mich., sees crackers appealing to consumers in several different ways. “Crackers are tied to a few big consumer trends — the desire for healthier eating, more entertaining at home and the need for on-the-move food,” he notes. “We are seeing consistent growth across our entire snack business, with crackers being particularly strong.”

Shipments in the commercial bakeries industry are over $11.09 billion.

What can I say . . . . America loves Crackers!

que sera sera . . Whatever will be, will be

2010-06-09T20:40:00.003-04:00

If Congress awards amnesty and residency to twenty million criminal trespassers called illegal’s, and they vote . . . we can say farewell to the existence of the USA as we know it, in fewer than five years.

If the turnout in November is as pathetic as it was in the primaries, just turn off the lights as you leave the voting booth. By the following election, you won't be pressing 1 for English.

For those who feel that as a nation we must speak English, we have never had a national language bill passed. Just about 87% say English should be the official language of the United States. Eighteen percent of households in the US do not speak English in their own homes, over 17 million of these households do not speak English very well. Nearly seven million speak little or no English, 20 percent, about 52 million people, speak other languages.

Most of these families -- 32 million of the 50 million people -- are Spanish-speakers. 152,000 Americans speak Lao at home, 174,000 Hmong; 312,000 speak Greek, 203,000 speak Armenian, 173,000 speak Navajo, 276,000 speak Gujurati, 812,000 speak Russian, 802,000 speak Italian, 2.3 million speak Chinese, 1.4 million speak French. In these homes about 5 million children, principally new immigrants, arrive at schools with very little English competency.

The vast majority of non-English speakers (75%) live in just seven states, Arizona, California, New York, New Jersey, Florida, Texas and Illinois. Will the 112th Congress pass national language legislation? Who knows . . . "que sera sera..."

. . . of the people, by the people, and for the people . .

2010-06-03T21:45:00.003-04:00

Either we beef up the borders with the military, or up the Border Guard staff. Trillions are spent in thirty three foreign countries for American troops to protect them, but not one dollar is spent on them to protect American borders.

The Constitution states in Section 4. The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

The US Army exists to defend the US from foreign invasion, which is expressly authorized by the US Constitution. Guarding US borders from foreign invasion is not "law enforcement." Guarding the Mexican border was the Army's primary peacetime mission until 1940, and no one ever declared this was in violation of this 1878 act. The US Border Patrol was formed in 1924 and currently has 9700 agents covering 8,000 miles of US borders. That is 1.2 Border Guards for each 1000.

Much of the border is not patrolled simply because it is too dangerous. In 2002, six Mexican Army Hummers were two miles inside US territory when Mexican soldiers fired over 150 rounds from vehicle-mounted machine guns, and a dozen MK-19 40mm grenade rounds, at two US Border Patrol agents investigating narcotics trafficking. In 2002, a US Park Ranger was killed when drug smugglers sprayed him with bullets from an AK-47, which struck him just below his bulletproof vest.

We have a fence that covers about 30% of the 2000 mile fence along the Mexican border, half of it covering Arizona. A government audit released last year reported thousands of fence breaches at a cost of $1,300 for each repair. On top of the price tag for building the fence, it will cost another $6.5 billion over the next 20 years to maintain it and related equipment. The Government Accountability Office has revealed that three persons “linked to terrorism” and 530 aliens from “special interest countries” were intercepted at Border Patrol checkpoints last year. The Border Guard estimates that 700,000 unknown persons slipped past them last year.

A multibillion-dollar “virtual fence” (dubbed SBInet) along the southwestern border promised for completion in 2009 to protect the U.S. from terrorists, violent drug smugglers and a flood of illegal immigrants is a long way from becoming a reality, and may never be completed. At one time, the government proposed lining the entire southwestern border with cameras, sensors and wired command centers that could detect illegal border crossers. But after spending somewhere in the neighborhood of $800 million, the defense contractor hired to build SBInet, Boeing Co., will complete only about 50 miles for certain.

Since February 2007, according to a review of federal records by The Washington Times, GAO has been telling Congress and Homeland Security that its high-tech border protection system needed better oversight and accountability, and it lacked realistic measures of cost, timing and benefits. In building the fence, one obstacle from the start was the government never came up with detailed requirements for the system and they never talked to the Border Patrol.

With the virtual fence already on an unstable foundation, the Obama administration has announced significant budget cuts for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) programs. Programs that depend on costly manpower, fencing, infrastructure and technology. President Obama's proposed 2011 budget would reduce the number of Border Patrol agents along the Southwest border by 180 agents, and cut the funding by $226 million for the "virtual fence."

Immigration reform was an issue Obama promised Latino groups that he would take up in his first year in office. However Obama now says, “I don’t want us to do something just for the sake of politics that doesn’t solve the problem.” To deal with it now could cost his administration votes this November. If the issue of immigration lies dormant for the rest of this year, Democrats will blame it on the Republican opposition, in actuality many Democrats probably don’t want to deal with an immigration bill this year either.

If the current administration is not serious about enforcing our nation’s immigration laws, in not wanting to deal with it, how can anyone criticize Arizona or any other state for setting their own immigration policies?

Is it about political strategy so as not to lose votes, or is it about a government that is supposed to represent the legal citizens of this country? A government that was supposedly elected by the people, for the people to represent the people.

~ Joe Sinagra

Amnesty will not Stop Illegal Immigration

2010-05-14T15:41:00.007-04:00

In 1997, the illegal alien population was 54 percent Mexican. The illegal alien population is currently 70 percent Mexican, adding another 30 percent coming from other countries. Latin America, including Mexico, is the source of 90 percent of illegal aliens entering into the United States.

Not all illegal aliens are from Mexico.

A Fox News article stated that "it is not just Mexicans who are flooding into our border states anymore. Along with Nicaraguans, Brazilians, Venezuelans, Ecuadorians, and Chileans, agents of the Border Patrol now encounter Chinese, Pakistanis, and Indians.

Intentionally low statistics, and misleading official government estimates claim that 8 million to 12 million illegal aliens reside in the United States and 700,000 new illegal’s enter and stay every year. Closer to the truth is more than 25 million illegal aliens presently reside in the United States, with roughly 16,000 additional illegal aliens entering every day, or as many media outlets like to label it . . . "undocumented".

Many illegal immigrants obtain their "illegal" status by entering the country illegally. Once in the foreign country, illegal immigrants tend to become employed in what is known as "low skilled jobs." These jobs are often labor intensive and tend not to attract many employees or draw attention to them. It is common for illegal immigrants to have family or friends in a foreign country, in areas with high immigrant populations, where closed societies are formed which often offer support to illegals.

Our government has failed to control illegal immigration on all levels. Legislators are now addressing the problem at the local level, with bills to manage it incrementally, piece-by-piece, rather than trying to fix this national calamity at once—enforcement now becoming a near impossible task.

The majorities of Americans are demanding we secure the borders, enforce existing laws with no sanctuary status, and punish employers who violate employment laws, remove incentives by curbing social services and demand that Latin American leaders discourage illegal entry into our country.

By removing the social services and job inducement that attract them into our country, significant self-deportation will occur. This is now the case with many returning to Mexico as there isn’t any work in our current economy.

We have immigration laws that must be enforced, using our military to help police our borders could possibly be an asset in protecting homeland security.

We proclaim that we are a nation of laws, but yet have been lax in enforcing those laws and our immigration policies.

Since 1929, illegal entry into the United States has been a federal crime. Those of us who live here legally are citizens not residents. Many immigrants came from other countries to Ellis Island studying to gain citizenship, all taking the time to learn our history, language, laws, to become part of this great nation. Not only so they could take advantage of the opportunities America had to offer, but to contribute to our society as well. They did not expect a government that bestowed them with entitlements.

The great majorities of Americans respect our laws and raise their children to do the same, yet they're painfully aware of the millions who enter our country who not only violate our immigration laws, but virtually every law that exists.

The opportunity to live and work in America must remain an invited and controlled privilege, not to be gained by backdoor amnesty tactics or by paying a small fine.

Over $28 billion is sent back across the border every year. Not all of it is to support the poor families over the border, much of it is used to pay for off the human smugglers and drug cartels back home.

Illegal’s also pay a price for unreported crimes against them, for fear of deportation. Many will not assimilate into our society due to the fact that they do not need to, or for that matter have to.

Preserving your culture is one thing, but to push your heritage while in another country illegally is quite rude and insulting.

Thousands upon thousands of Americans, lose their jobs and homes due to illegal hiring, the undercutting of prevailing wages, jobs lost to NAFTA and offshore business. The cry of Illegal’s that do the work that Americans won’t do is nothing but a self-serving myth. Citizens and legal immigrants would proudly fill those jobs, but at prevailing wage.

It is also ironic, the very same people here illegally who cry their rights are being violated, while mocking our laws, our principles and demanding that legal citizens pay their way because of the plight they are in, is offensive. But yet, in returning to their own country as prospects dry up in the United States, they object to their current situation that they are being forced to return to their old way of life. Their own government complains that they now have the added stress that will be placed on their economy of providing for returning illegal’s. It would now overtax the burden that would be placed on their schools, housing, and hospitals of their society, they don't have the funds to provide for those services.

Many legislators "talk tough" about border security while at the same time they provide billions of dollars in government services for those in the country illegally, it is somewhat paradoxical.

Border Guards are expected to enforce border control, and arrest or detain anyone who enters the US without going through the proper channels. But yet if that same illegal were to get through and get lost into any town across the country amongst their groups, they are now offended if their legal status is questioned, and the illegal groups rally that they are being harassed.

In order to recognize the seriousness of the crisis and urgency for a return to the rule of law and secured borders that the United States Constitution demands, it is important to recognize the magnitude of the facts and principles that have been established for our protection. Until the Federal Government reacts to what has been ignored for years, it cannot fault states that make their own laws to control an out of control situation.

Legislators regardless of what party they belong to would be remiss in ignoring the situation at hand, only because it is dependent on whether or not they would secure their re-election.

The American people, the citizens of this country would like to have our existing laws enforced, not to re-write history. It is hard to achieve the American dream, whatever those dreams may be, when you are not an American.

It needs to be addressed before it gets worse, and now may be the time with so many illegal’s going back home.

Writer William Weiss had this to say,
Amnesty is not viable because it neither reduces nor eliminates illegal immigration. The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted amnesty to illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and who had been continuous residents. An estimated two to three million people gained citizenship as a result of this bi-partisan bill sponsored by a Republican president and a Democratic Congressional majority. Both sides of the aisle were part of this “solution.” More than 20 years later, we still have the same problem -- only it is five to 10 times worse.

Amnesty is not the cure all, and by allowing the crossing of our borders on a daily basis to continue without re-enforcement is not the answer either. An amnesty bill in itself will not curtail illegals from entering the United States, and in fact would only exacerbate an all ready out of control situation.

It must be an equitable solution by all, a solution that will remedy our current state of affairs, and correct future immigration policies so we are never in this situation again.

It would be unjust to set in motion and push forth a measure on a national level merely for the sake of getting it done and the mentality "we did it first", the legal citizens of America must not let that happen.

~ Joe Sinagra

Immigration Reform . . . A Sleeping Giant

2010-05-05T21:59:00.001-04:00

As a nation of immigrants, we should have sense enough to distinguish between immigrants who have come seeking freedom, and wary of those who might take it away.

It could mean lost votes for the party against immigration reform, building a stronger alliance amongst illegal’s for the party in favor of reform. The controlling party in favor of amnesty will gain support amongst those who have been here illegally, but will still need the cooperation of the American Public to remain in power if they are to pursue amnesty to garner those votes. But in trying to gain the support of the illegal groups, that party may lose credibility with the American public, and be the end for the party that proposes amnesty for many years to come.

The mathematical calculations are simple. Legalizing and enfranchising millions of voters who will favor liberal Democrats by 60 to 75 percent will inflict enormous political, economic, and social damage on the nation that could last for generations. Hope for lower taxes, reduced government spending and regulation, strengthened constitutional government, and a society that honors the moral and religious traditions of its founders will be down the drain along with all the other values that make for a strong and free nation. It would assimilate into our society those who know little of our history, our constitutional principles, and our moral foundations, and who might by demagoguery and ignorance unwittingly be the instruments of our destruction.

Should amnesty be placed on the table again, it could make a mockery of our laws. Illegals will continue to come, hoping and knowing they could expect a subsequent amnesty.

Un-employment for African-Americans is in excess of 15% and higher for those 45 and over. Would any American at this point want to open the door and add 12 million more people in terms of all legal rights and benefits when we can’t even provide healthcare and benefits for the people who are citizens, or jobs? $28 billion a year leaves this country in terms of income to undocumented families.

Does just being here qualify one to become a citizen? Those who worked hard to become part of our society verses someone who contributed nothing. What will be the gauge to judge the path to citizenship?

Amnesty hastens even more illegal immigration, as amnestied individuals will come to join relatives or believe that if they can just elude the Border Patrol and stay underground for a few years, they will eventually get amnesty themselves.

Amnesty is unfair to the millions of aliens who are waiting outside the country for their turn to come legally to the United States.

Amnesty will punish the legal immigrants by greatly increasing the time it takes to obtain visas. Because of the 1986 amnesty, permanent residents now have to wait 4 to 6 years to obtain visas for their wives and husbands. Once illegal immigrants are given amnesty and lawful permanent residence, they can petition for visas for their family members - increasing the backlog of petitions by years.

Immigration reform will be discussed and shuffled around, but nothing will be done prior to November. Once again it will become a political football as in 1986, distracting and dividing the public from the other issues at hand. It will not be pushed through like the Health Care bill, as it will become political suicide for many legislators if that were to happen.

Immigration reform cannot be pushed through just for the sake of party power. If reform is to take place it must be a bipartisan effort, not one party or the other trying to grandstand. Reform that will not reward illegal’s at the expense of those who earned their right to become citizens, reform that is fair and not create divisiveness amongst the voters of this country.

Immigration reform is the sleeping giant that will change the landscape of America as we know it, forever. Without thoughtful deliberation, once in motion the consequences cannot be reversed.

The issue of immigration reform cannot be pushed thru. Nor, should we as voters allow it to be.

~ Joe Sinagra

The Cost of Paying for Better Healthcare

2010-03-27T10:44:00.000-04:00

A small business with fewer than 50 employees is not required to carry health insurance. Many of those businesses owners will drop their coverage for employees. Other small businesses that have just over the required amount of employees will lay off workers and use temps or farm out to subs. Two part-time workers will be considered as one full-time employee. Companies with over 50 employees will now be considered larger employers.

Many companies will cut hours so employees will fall under part time status (390 hours). This is why 16000 new IRS agents are needed to oversee and enforce the new rules. Employers with 50 or fewer full time employees will be exempt from penalties and it will affect future hiring, leaving workers legally obligated to either buy the government mandated high-premium comprehensive insurance out of their own pockets using after-tax dollars, or pay the new penalty for remaining uninsured.

Employers with more than 200 workers are required to automatically enroll new full-time employees in health-care coverage. Giving large employers as well, more than enough financial motivation to discontinue health coverage as the $2,000 penalty per employee is well below what they are currently paying.

This tax will add significantly to small business expenditures, regardless of whether they choose to offer health benefits to their employees or not. The bill creates a strong deterrent for a business to expand compensation or even acquire new workers. As a business nears a higher payroll bracket, it also risks spending a much higher percentage of its earnings to pay the penalty tax. Any small business owner is going to reconsider before offering bonuses or wage increases to its workers.

Moderate-income self-employed people who can’t afford the high-priced comprehensive health plans and aren’t eligible for subsidies would not only lose their insurance, but would pay a penalty for remaining uninsured.

Employers of non-elderly people working part-time will be exempt from providing them insurance, but the people themselves will not be exempt from the requirement to obtain the government-specific comprehensive insurance on their own. Persons in these categories will be required to either buy the government specified high-premium comprehensive insurance out of their own pockets using after-tax dollars, or pay the penalty for remaining uninsured.

For older working age adults and early retirees aged 45-64, they will be hit with new taxes despite the promise not to raise taxes on households earning less than $250,000 per year. Households headed by individuals aged 45-64 who deduct medical expenses on their 1040 tax form, who ought to be helped by a health care reform bill, would see a tax increase of about $200 on average. The higher the medical expenses faced by these families the higher the tax increase they would face. Kind of like auto insurance, the higher the claim the more you pay.

Low-income families are in danger as bill creates incentives for employers to avoid hiring members of low-income families. The employer mandate would require employers with 50 or more employees to offer insurance to all employees or pay a penalty of $750 per worker. If the employer does offer insurance, they would still pay a fine – but only if they hire workers from low-income families! If the employee’s portion of the cost exceeds 9.8 percent of the employee’s family income, and that employee is eligible to receive a premium subsidy (“affordability credit”), the employer would be slapped with a $3,000 penalty. This is based on family income, so employers would be better off hiring workers with few dependents or with other sources of income, rather than those with a single source of income and several dependents. Employers would be punished for hiring the members of society who need jobs the most.

Businesses that are affected by this tax will react to its outcome, especially during a period of economic downturn. Those who could not afford to offer health benefits or pay the higher tax would look for other ways to outfox the government, effectively by containing or reducing wages, and not hiring additional workforce.

Last month, another 190,000 jobs were lost. With unemployment rate hovering at 10%, this is the opposite course Congress should be sending small business. The Federal job base continues to grow as jobs in the private sector shrink.

Research shows that healthcare would not decrease costs for American families and small businesses. How can it when $729.5 billion of new taxes are imposed on the same small businesses and individuals who are already struggling to afford health coverage?

Hospitals are slated to lose $155 billion in federal funding over the next decade; the bill calls for $132 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage plans, the private health plans that cover one in five seniors; new taxes on the industry total $70 billion over 10 years, beginning in 2014; nursing homes would see their Medicare reimbursements cut by about $15 billion over the next decade. While Medicare comprises only about 13 percent of nursing home revenue, the industry relies on the money to offset low Medicaid reimbursement.

Citizens and legal residents must have health insurance or pay a penalty. There would be no change in the law that requires emergency rooms to treat people who need emergency care, including undocumented immigrants. There is already a federal grant program that compensates states for emergency room costs associated with treatment of undocumented immigrants, a provision sponsored by a Republican lawmaker.

The American people are being forced to sign on the dotted line and pay for a product they have not yet seen.

The Liberal Tsunami and the Voter Aftershock

2010-03-26T08:30:00.000-04:00

Millions of Americans are going to be required to purchase insurance, and they will face a fine if they refuse. More than likely if the fines are not paid the IRS will punish those who don’t by adding interest on top of those penalties, just like any other time when you owe the government money. Of course Obama and those next to him don’t fall under the same rules that apply to the rest of the population.

In an interview on whether illegal immigrants should be covered under the new health care plan, President Obama responded, "no." But said there may need to be an exception to that policy for children. "First of all, I'd like to create a situation where we're dealing with illegal immigration, so that we don't have illegal immigrants, and we've got legal residents or citizens who are eligible for the plan. And I want a comprehensive immigration plan that creates a pathway to achieve that."

Amnesty will be next under the guise of health coverage for the children. I assume the American public will be funding the illegal children through the mandatory coverage portion of the bill. The American population will be forced to pay for this coverage.

Children, here illegally in our playgrounds and schools that are potentially passing on illnesses and communicable diseases should not be in our schools to start with. There are many adult illegal’s are working in the food industry, who have the same diseases.

It will start with the children and extend itself from there.

In a Democracy there will always be those at the bottom, in the middle, and at the top. In his inaugural address Obama left out the word “created” and stated, “the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.”

Those who don’t have anything will always want something paid for by those who have earned the right to what they have, no matter what it is. Those who have the ability and means will be regulated by law to pay for those who don’t.

Brace yourselves for the next wave. The liberal tsunami has started; they will let you know what is good for you . . . even if you don’t want it.

I believe the aftershock will be coming in November.

The issue of illegal aliens’ must be addressed

2010-03-15T12:14:00.001-04:00

Americans pay nearly $22 billion yearly supplying illegal immigrants with welfare benefits that include food assistance programs such as free school lunches in public schools, food stamps and a nutritional program, also known as WIC, for low-income women and their children. Tens of billions more are spent on other social services, medical care, public education and legal costs such as incarceration and public defenders.

With approximately 400,000 aliens currently residing illegally in the state, the largest fiscal liability is public education representing a cost at $1.85 billion annually.

Taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to an estimated $200 million a year.

The uncompensated cost of incarcerating deportable illegal aliens in New Jersey’s state and local prisons amounts to about $50 million a year.

The illegal alien population residing in New Jersey cost the taxpayers of this state nearly $2.1 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration. For every New Jersey household headed by a native-born resident, that adds an additional $800 to their yearly costs.

The price tag of illegal immigration would be significantly higher if other cost areas were calculated, such as preventive health programs, special English instruction, and interpretation services in courts and hospitals, welfare programs used by U.S.-born children of illegal aliens, and welfare benefits for American workers displaced by illegal alien workers.

If the prospect of amnesty were passed in any form, family members of the current illegal alien population would be sponsored to come to the United States reuniting with families, which would increase the size of the poverty and near-poverty population likely to use public services.

Citizens are losing their savings, homes, and jobs, and to add insult to injury should The Healthcare Plan pass we would be mandated to pay for health coverage or pay a fine. We will still pay for those taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays.

New Jersey cannot continue to overlook the immense burden placed on the state budget and expect its own citizens to pay when they cannot support themselves.

If we are to accomplish any future tax relief the issue of illegal aliens’ must be addressed.

~ Joe Sinagra

Can we ignore the predictable consequences that nothing is free?

2010-01-16T10:49:00.002-05:00

Health care has been a driving force for much conversation over the past several months for many citizens. Although it may be number four or five on most people’s list, as taxes and jobs may be their top priorities. It is Obama and the Democrats who are making this an important topic as they are the ones who want to take over the health care industry, in essence this has become the epic-center of attention.

A concept that has not been considered and may very well fuel higher costs coupled with the new health care plan if it is not addressed relatively quickly. Whether you have private insurance, Medicare, or Medicaid, the majority of us do not care about shopping for the costs affiliated with health care. We just produce a provider card and accept the charge. Those without coverage and use the emergency room as a doctor’s office, accept the cost despite the expense.

If I were to pay or take out insurance to cover your groceries, would you buy the chop meat or go for the filet mignon as cost would not be a factor since someone else was paying for it?

The motivation behind keeping costs down is free market competition. Using the electronics industry as an example they are priced high as new products become available. As the product becomes popular or a competitive brand becomes available, pricing is driven down as consumers will shop to find the lowest price possible.

Obama's health plan doesn’t permit price competition or free market measures to offset and force prices down. With a government option and a mandate that all Americans are required to have government approved health care, the lack of price competitiveness will be eliminated given that no one will shop for pricing, as everyone will have some form of health care paid for by government programs or private insurance until they are eliminated as they will not be able to compete with the government provision.

If most individuals were told to buy a car with money provided by someone else and there was no need to price shop since the money was being provided, would the buyer purchase a new KIA, used car or head straight for the Jaguar dealer?

Health care will have the same problem. Those who are already on the government payroll do not seek the lowest cost physician but just go to the doctor for anything. They do not search for the lowest priced pharmacy but head to the pharmacy and hand the pharmacist their health care card.
Those who have private insurance do exactly the same thing because the natural attitude is that insurance whether government or private is paying for it so why should I shop price? Also private insurance pricing has little competition because of the fact that one cannot purchase insurance outside of the state in which one lives eliminates national competitiveness for insurance companies and keeps the cost high since no one company has enough insured individuals to reduce cost by volume.

Lasik eye surgery is not covered under current health care plans. Those who used a Lasik procedure price shopped and in the last three years the cost of Lasik surgery has decreased by 30%. Yet every health care plan that is being proposed by Obama and his clique seeks to eliminate the one element of health care which does cause a certain amount of price shopping and that is the co-pay. The higher the co-pay on a plan the more the insured individual is sensitive to the price and as such will research before getting certain treatments and will not seek unnecessary treatment for simple problems. Especially when that co-pay is based on a percentage, not just a fixed price.

The illusion that Obama and Democrats are creating that forced health care and government provided health care is going to iron out all the systems problems and reduce cost is the singular most blatant deception with their argument. Forced health care coverage paid for by government funds, (taxpayers), will eliminate price concerns or price shopping thus competition for services. Also as price competition decreases services will follow since consumers will not be concerned about cost or who provides service because it will all be "taken care of” by taxpayer dollars.

When Medicare Costs payments are cut by 25% as to what doctors can receive as payments, many doctors will opt out of accepting the plan. More and more doctors already are turning away Medicare patients because of the diminished reimbursements and the growing delay in payments. Medicaid is worse; many doctors do not take Medicaid patients.

Promises by the Obama administration is that universal health insurance will avoid all these problems. How is that possible when you consider that the medical turnstiles will be the same as they are now, only they will be clogged with more and more patients? The remaining doctors in this expanded system will be even more overwhelmed than they are now.

Two trends are converging: there is a shortage of internists nationally — the American College of Physicians, the organization for internists, estimates that by 2025 there will be 35,000 to 45,000 fewer than the population needs — and internists are increasingly unwilling to accept new Medicare patients.

Services and the quality of service will deteriorate as doctors will be forced to accept a government controlled pricing schedule. Research will decrease as standard services will be all that is provided because of lack of competitiveness for special and normal doctors services, therefore new and more innovative procedures will no longer be sought after, medical research and discovery will dry up.

When someone else pays for all aspects of health care, it creates a lazy dependency by consumers, eliminates free market enterprise like price and service shopping which as a result raises cost rather than lowering. Government will step in to dictate who, what, when, and where with references to doctors services, and the quality of that service will suffer as a result. We will not have to look far at what will happen when our free market system is bypassed for any given product or service and the resulting higher price and poorer quality to see how destructive and dangerous Obamacare will be for America.

As a people we will have lost our freedom to choose and our right to compete.

As we rush towards the utopian ideal of “free care”, will we ignore the predictable consequences that nothing is free?

~ Joe Sinagra

Not only have we lost jobs, we have lost the Freedom of choice

2009-12-24T09:36:00.002-05:00

As many as 24 million people would still remain uninsured in 2019; many of them otherwise eligible Americans who still can't afford the premiums. Over 60% of the American public was opposed to the new health plan, but it the Democrats had to push it through because it was all about change. The only change I see is in voting every one of them out. This plan will cost more and not save you a penny.

The new plan will phase in little by little, over the next three to four years. Ultimately all Americans will be mandated to carry coverage or face a tax penalty, except in cases of financial hardship. Insurers won't be able to deny coverage to people with health problems, or charge them more or cut them off. A family of four with annual income between $22,000 and $66,000 would face a fine ranging from $750 to $1,500 a year if they failed to buy health insurance. For families earning more than $66,000, the fine could be as steep as $3,800. Provisions of the bill cause the government to take two-thirds of any additional income of a family with a modest income of $54,000.

As a poor family earns more income, their subsidy is reduced, and the cut in the subsidy falls faster than the rise in the family’s income until the family’s income has risen to the point where it no longer qualifies for a subsidy.

A higher pay check means higher Federal income taxes. A family earning $54,000 a year is in a 25 per cent marginal tax bracket. 25 per cent of the addition $12,000 means $3,000 in extra Federal income tax.

Now, over time this family has increased earnings of $12,000, means higher Social Security and Medicare contributions of 7.65 per cent (actually, double this figure, since the employee pays the employers share in the form of lower wages, not considered here). This amounts to a deduction of another $918 from the $12,000 pay raise. So far, the government has taxed $6,718 out of the $12,000 raise.

Given all these deductions for taxes and fees, the actual amount of additional purchasing power to the example family from a $12,000 raise in pay is only about $4,000, or one-third of the supposed increase their increase in income.

Under the legislation those who now will have the most trouble finding and keeping coverage: people who buy their own insurance or work for small businesses.

Some people's taxes would go up.

Buying into Medicare won't be cheap, about $7,600 a year not counting out-of-pocket costs for deductibles and copayments.

A new report from government economic analysts at the Health and Human Services Department found that the nation’s $2.5 trillion annual health care tab won’t shrink under the Democratic proposal that senators just passed. Instead, it would grow somewhat more rapidly than if Congress did nothing. Something the Democrats just happened to leave out while the snake oil was being pushed to the public.

Also troubling was the report’s assessment that the Democrats’ plan to squeeze Medicare for $493 billion over 10 years in savings relies on specific policy changes that “may be unrealistic” and could lead to cuts in services.

The report somberly warned that a new long-term care insurance plan included in the legislation could “face a significant risk of failure” because it would attract people in poor health, leading to higher and higher premiums, and eventually triggering an “insurance death spiral.”

"Health-care reform cannot be considered successful if it makes coverage more expensive," said Scott P. Serota, Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association president and CEO.

The “individual responsibility” provision in Section 1501 (pages 320-340) would require anyone who fails to obtain a qualifying health plan – with a benefit package to be defined later by bureaucrats – to pay an annual tax penalty of $750 per adult family member and $375 per child, with a maximum penalty of $2,250 per family. These penalties will be phased in from 2014 to 2016 and then indexed for inflation, which means they are likely to increase nearly every year. These taxes are fixed amounts based on family size, not income.

The rich will not pay more, and the middle class will not pay less (although the poor may qualify for exemptions). This is even worse than the House bill, which imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of modified adjusted gross income above the minimum income necessary to file a tax return. A family of at least two adults and two children is actually worse off under the Senate bill if they make less than $99,350 a year and worse off under the House bill if they make more. The only nod to affordability is a “hardship exemption” if the lowest available premium for a bare-bones plan is more than 8 percent of your income. But that saves you money only if your income is less than $28,125 a year.

Companies with more than 50 employees are required to offer qualified health plans, to their full-time employees or pay a tax of $750 per full-time employee. That’s a lot cheaper than providing health insurance, and the $750 is just a tax – it doesn’t count towards the employee’s premium.

However, an employer who does offer qualifying insurance isn’t off the hook. Suppose an employer offers insurance, but has an employee from a low-income family who qualifies for a premium subsidy in the “health insurance exchange” and decides to accept it. In that case, the employer is stuck with a tax penalty of $3,000 for that employee, and every other employee who qualifies and makes that same choice – unless it’s more than a quarter of the employees, in which case the tax is capped at $750 times the total number of full-time employees. (Workers will be permitted to opt out of their employer’s plan only if they qualify for a subsidy, have insurance through another family member, or if the employer covers less than 60 percent of their premium.)

In other words, if a company has a lot of low-income workers, they can save money by dropping their health plan and just paying the $750 per-employee tax. (And they can make as many employees as possible part-time.) However, if they have mostly middle-income workers, they face a heavy penalty — $3,000 – every time they hire a worker from a low-income family. This goes by the employee’s family income, not the income the employee is paid by any particular company. So a company could save $3,000 by hiring, say, someone with a working spouse or a teenager with working parents, rather than a single mother with three children.

Even worse, if at least a quarter of the employees qualify for a premium subsidy based on their income and family size, the company is going to end up paying the same $750 per-employee tax – whether they offer insurance or not! So companies with a lot of low-income employees will essentially be encouraged to drop their health plans entire, dumping the remaining higher-income employees into the federal exchange at their own expense.

Employers will have a strong tax incentive to lay off the workers who need the jobs most – people without other sources of income.

New taxes and fees imposed on businesses will "discourage companies from hiring or continuing to employ low-income and moderate-income workers. Small-business owners who do not generate enough revenue to pay their workers' wages in addition to the new taxes and fees would be forced to lay off their lowest-paid employees to comply with the law. So in essence the next person in line would be the next lowest-paid employee?

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stated, "By holding down the growth of national saving and real capital accumulation, the prospective increase in the budget deficit will place at risk future living standards of our country." And according to the Congressional Budget Office, "Large budget deficits would reduce national saving, leading to more borrowing from abroad and less domestic investment, which in turn would depress income growth in the United States. Over time, the accumulation of debt would seriously harm the economy.”

As prospective cuts to Medicare Advantage are made, writes Michael D. Tanner of Cato, "many insurers are expected to stop participating in the program, while others will probably increase the premiums they charge seniors." The Congressional Budget Office agrees, saying that cuts to Medicare Advantage "could lead many plans to limit the benefits they offer, raise their premiums, or withdraw from the program," devastating seniors' health care options.

A number of proposals will assume steep cuts in Medicare payments to doctors. It would cut payments to doctors by 25 percent in 2011, with even steeper cuts later, the Wall Street Journal says these cuts "will cause many doctors to quit the program."

Medicare patients already have difficulty finding doctors, especially in some markets, would be exacerbated as the number of doctors willing to treat Medicare patients will shrink at the very time the number of Medicare recipients is increasing (due to the retirement of baby boomers, and other factors).

The new Health Plan will erode your privacy by expanding the IRS and mandating that insurers, employers and government agencies share with one another your personal financial information. They will have the authority at some point to invade you savings or checking to determine whether you can afford health care or not.

The National Federation of Independent Business estimates that mandating that employers provide health care will cost an additional 1.6 million jobs by 2013.

Unemployment is at a 25 year high, yet the White House and Congress continue to ignore the ruinous cost health care reform legislation will have on small business.

It is small businesses that drive our economy. This bill will not only kill jobs, it will prevent job growth and expansion.

We can look towards higher insurance premiums, more and higher taxes, fewer jobs, lower wages, a reduced standard of living and an erosion of privacy and individual liberty.

This is a bill about control and nothing else. We are now being mandated by our government to carry healthcare or be penalized if we don’t.

This is a sickening abuse of governmental power and a violation of every American's right to decide what is best for themselves and his or her family.

We as Americans have lost another freedom, the freedom of choice.

How much longer before we lose our right to vote?

~ Joe Sinagra

Regrets and Thank You

2009-11-05T22:46:00.001-05:00

First and foremost, I would like to thank the voters of the 18th District who showed their tremendous support in wanting to change the course of New Jersey legislature, and for not believing in the negative, malicious attacks against me. I firmly believe it is the voters of this state who come first; I do not take their concerns lightly, nor take their votes for granted.

Thanks to my family for their patience in putting up with endless hours of campaign talk, phone calls, posters, flyers, the literature strewn about the house, friends for their support and the people of the district who cast their vote in my run for state office. Congratulations to the winners and my congratulations to those who weren’t so fortunate in their bid for holding office. I congratulate them as well for trying as they did not lose, a loser is one who never tries, and trying is the only way you will ever win.

My running mate Bob Jones, for working tirelessly non-stop in his door to door efforts, and my thanks to one of the best campaign teams I have had since entering the political arena. The volunteers who spent hours each day campaigning for candidates they believed in, I cannot thank you enough. It is because of your efforts and dedication, that we came as close as we did.

By coming so close to winning, I believe the voters of this district and throughout the state, regardless of party affiliation are tired of politics as usual and have spoken. Voters who are tired of corruption, high taxes, unfulfilled promises, and citizens looking for government they can believe in, government that will represent them.

My only regret is that I will not have the opportunity to represent those who believed I could make a difference.

Who knows what the future may hold, until then I believe we are well on our way to a better New Jersey and a brighter future.

Joe Sinagra
2009 18th District NJ Assembly Candidate

Conservative Majority New Jersey Assembly Endorsements: 18th Legislative District

2009-10-29T11:04:00.002-04:00

CWA-NJ Executive Committee | 29 October

18th Legislative District
We have added one more late Assembly endorsement to the list of challengers, (and may still have one last one later today). This endorsement is from the 18th Legislative District where Conservative Majority New Jersey has endorsed Joe Sinagra for Assembly.

If anyone can face a strong challenge that is in front of him and overcome it, it is Joe Sinagra. An Air Force veteran during the Vietnam War, a husband, father and a good man, there needs to be more Joe Sinagra’s serving in Public Office.

Joe has received endorsements for this race from the New Jersey Right to Life, the NRA with a AQ rating, and PENPAK Commerce & Industry Association of New Jersey (CIANJ).

Please join us in supporting Joe Sinagra’s campaign for the Office of Assembly in the 18th Legislative District.

Please visit Joe’s website to find out how you could help by donating or volunteering.

Jones, Sinagra will fight for lower taxes

2009-10-29T07:16:00.002-04:00

I find it appalling that our current assemblymen Patrick Diegnan and Peter Barnes would resort to sending out mailers with so many untruths.

Marching in lockstep with Corzine, they voted for every increase the governor asked for. The voting record is on the web; I didn't have to look very hard. They would rather sling mud than to talk about your record of voting "yes" to $9 billion in tax increases, cutting school funding, increasing municipal taxes, and penalizing small business owners throughout New Jersey.

Joe Sinagra and Bob Jones have stuck to the issues; you have not and have thrown the first stone. Mr. Diegnan and Mr. Barnes deliberately sent out mailers through the Democratic Party attacking two standup gentlemen to steer us away from their own voting records.

Anyone who has followed Joe Sinagra, his letters, and campaigns would know these mailers are nothing but propaganda to try and sway the voters. Mr. Sinagra has been fighting for lower taxes since 2002, has been an advocate for the taxpayers of this state, had stuck up for the seniors and veterans. His letters in regards to taxes have always been in favor of the voters, not government, and he has been endorsed twice by the Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey. Mr. Sinagra is a bi-partisan candidate who can work with both parties, as he is for the people first and not business as usual in Trenton.

Bob Jones was a member of the South Plainfield Board of Education and has numerous awards through several organizations, and was endorsed by the Women's Political Caucus of New Jersey, among many other respectable organizations.

Having been to several Tea Parties, and very active politically in New Jersey, I can tell you, Bob Jones and Joe Sinagra have no intent to increase taxes. Bob and Joe both have ideas for bringing jobs back into the state.

Personally, I would like to know why my taxes have risen so high, why has it become so costly to live in this state, why is our state unemployment so high, why education costs are being cut, why was our state funding cut?

This has all happened while the Barnes and Diegnan have been in office. Rather than answer those questions, they would rather confuse the voters with nonsense. They'd rather become re-elected through deceit, smoke and mirrors, only to elevate our taxes once more.

It's time to shake up the Trenton political attitude. You cannot continue continue to replenish the state's pockets at my expense. Household incomes are shrinking; looking at mine, let me ask you a question Mr. Barnes and Mr. Diegnan: "What have you done for me lately? "

S. B.

East Brunswick

Trough Candidate wins Home News endorsement again

2009-10-28T10:23:00.004-04:00

Despite the fact Assemblyman Barnes first act after winning the assembly seat in 2007 was to appropriate $100,000 to the entire budget of the Edison Symphony Orchestra in a year when we supposedly had no money and raised the sales tax 1% to help property taxes, has voted to raise taxes 115 times since then, voted yes for $9 billion dollars (along with Patrick Diegnan) in tax increases, received an “F” rating with the NFIB, he still managed to receive the Home News Editorial Endorsement.

One of the editors wanted to know why we don’t mandate private business to raise their salaries. My response to Mr. Racz, was if we have business moving out of state because they can’t afford to stay in New Jersey, how would you then mandate they raise their salaries, and expect them to return? And, how would you mandate this? I also pointed out that many minorities and uneducated have higher unemployment levels, and are being displaced because of the current job market, and mandating higher salaries from the private sector would only make it worse. Is this the next wave of liberal thinking, to try and mandate the salaries of private business? There is a reason it is called free enterprise.

I ran for Congress, knowing full well my chance of upsetting the Congressional seat was slim, but nevertheless I ran a hard campaign, again on limited funds against a well entrenched establishment. Politickernj had said that I received only 2% less votes than Buster Soaries, who in a better year spent over $1 million. One editor from the Courier News actually jumped out of his seat and pointed his finger at me calling me prejudice and walked out of the room for my stating of the facts on illegal immigration when I ran for Congress. It could be this same editor still holds a grudge as he was partial to favoring my opponent.

I had made some comments regarding Corzine at that same Review Board, having told them why someone would vote for this man for governor, when he won’t tell us his tax plans until after he is elected. The next day it was as if I wrote their Editorial Opinion page, it was printed almost verbatim, as witnessed by my running mate that year. As it turned out, the governor came out with his infamous asset monetization plan two months after he took office.

What I find ironic is that I received the Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey endorsement (CIANJ) from a panel of New Jersey businessmen. An endorsement I received because of my vision and plans on bringing business and jobs back into the state, and ways to place people back in the job market. An endorsement I place much more regard in, than that of an Editorial Review Board, an endorsement that is not given lightly by the business community.

The editorial failed to mention that I missed winning the last go around by less than 6%, with little money, and being outspent 20 to 1. I don’t put much faith in the Editorial Boards Opinion as it is only their opinion, what I find disturbing is how they go out of their way to make personal comments.

With that said, I would like to congratulate my running mate Bob Jones for his receiving the honors this year. I couldn’t have asked for a better person to campaign with. Bob is also concerned about the high taxes in this state, coupled with a sputtering economy. His insight to cutting costs if elected would be an asset to the voters in this state.

Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

Calling all jobs, where are you?

2009-10-26T10:03:00.000-04:00

New Jersey should put an ad in the careers section of the paper for “JOBS WANTED.” At the current rate of unemployment we have more people out of work than job creation. We know Jon Corzines claim of creating 13,000 jobs was a farce, since we lost 12,000 jobs last month.

I have received the Commerce and Industry Endorsement due to my plan and views on bringing business back to this state. We need to focus jobs, industry; careers to jump start this economy and bring back companies that left, while enticing new start-up companies to build in New Jersey. We need to eliminate the corporate tax, penalties, and regulations that hinder business from growing and expanding.

Chris Christie "renewable energy initiative" is a plan to make New Jersey more attractive to industry by making our state business-friendly and actively seeking out renewable energy manufactures. Bringing the next generation of industry and better paying jobs for the middle class. Offering tax credits and eliminating costly and time-consuming “use variances” or zoning changes for solar energy construction.

To have a true end to a recession, you need a strong economy. Without a growing job market, we can only expect more lost incomes, foreclosures, less spending, less savings, and more families leaving the state.

Corzine and our assembly are the cause of the State’s current dilemma, contrary to what they want you to believe. They want to run for reelection to fix this state? The Democrats have had since 2002 to prove themselves, and have failed miserably.

We need representatives that will put the people first, something the taxpayers of this state currently do not have.

Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

Assemblymen Diegan and Barnes Sink to a New Low

2009-10-22T23:25:00.000-04:00

These two Assemblymen are grasping for votes, their numbers are sinking and are putting out mailers that are blatant lies, misrepresentation, and non-factual, in an effort to regain their footing. They can't run on their record of voting YES of increasing you're taxes to $9 billion, so they have resorted to mudslinging.

Dear Mr. Diegnan and Mr. Barnes:

You recently sent a campaign mailer into the 18th District accusing me of being a tax cheat. A mailer, which for all intents and purposes, is designed to put in the minds of the voters that while they are struggling to pay their taxes, I do not pay mine. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Allow me to set the record straight:

My oldest son had a plumbing business under which I was the principal of the corporation.

Although I never received any funds or checks from the business - and drew no salary - ultimately as the corporation I was responsible for the business. As my son’s business base closed up, his bills became greater.

My son, in efforts to save his business, started out by laying off his help, closing his office and moving it into his home, hoping that the business would regain momentum. When it became evident this was not going to happen, he finally closed up shop.

In your recent mail piece, you state that I did not pay my State and Federal taxes. Get your facts straight - it was not a failure to pay taxes, but rather a lien against my son's business and the corporation. The liens - every penny of them - were satisfied several years ago.

Having lost one son through an accident in the Marines, my wife and I made a promise to do whatever we could to help our remaining son and daughter. I do not know of any responsible , loving parent who would not go out of their way to help their children get ahead, or help them if they were in trouble.

My son was in trouble with paying the back taxes and we paid them for him.

I did not run away from my responsibilities as a parent, or a businessman. I confronted the situation head on and did what was necessary to pay off this debt.

This is the same representation I will give the taxpayers if I am elected to office. I will not run or evade the hard issues we face ahead.

As our sitting Assemblymen, you should both be thoroughly ashamed of yourselves. This desperate attack on me and my family shows the lengths you will go to keep your current seats; obviously you will resort to anything. You have crossed the line - attacking not only me, but my family.

Knowing what it is to lose a beloved son, I have no regrets. I would do it again for my family. . . even at the risk of another smear tactic such as this one.
　
Joe Sinagra

Regards,
Joe Sinagra, Sr.
18th District Assembly Candidate

NJ Taxes are out of Control, Hurting Business and Citizens

2009-09-20T09:44:00.006-04:00

New Jersey foreclosures are rising due to the State Court backlog of filings, county filings will rise as New Jersey join’s the worst states in the nation for distressed properties.

In mid-August, state court officials acknowledged that the paperwork delays had made it look like New Jersey foreclosures declined in the first half of the year. After processing the backlog, foreclosures did not drop off, they actually increased 30 percent. As the New Jersey backlog catches up with its filings, New Jersey will be near the top as one of the nation’s leaders for foreclosures.

The average median household income in New Jersey dropped $7,214 between 2006 and 2008. The percentage of New Jersey residents below the federal poverty level is 9.2 percent and growing. The economy remains so poor that despite the claim of 13,000 new jobs created by Governor Corzine, the people of New Jersey still lost over 12,000 jobs since June, and another 47,000 are due to run out of unemployment benefits by December 2009. Under Corzine’s watch unemployment has increased more than double from 4.8% to 9.7% during his term.

The new jobs created don’t even come close to paying the salaries and benefits of those jobs that vanished. One in 20 people currently employed will lose their job in a matter of months, teenagers, minorities, and less-educated workers are losing their jobs to more educated willing to work for less money. African American unemployment has risen to 13.6%, and Hispanic unemployment in the state has risen to 11.5%, above the state average of 9.7%. Even if indicators point to a weakening of the recession, it will take several years for families who lost their homes and income to realize it is over, probably never again achieving past levels.

What these figures show is that New Jerseyans are losing their jobs and homes due to the failed policies instituted by the Corzine administration, carried on from the previous administration. Those who are supposed to represent us, instead of making the tough choices to create a state of affordability for our families and business, are creating more financial hardships for those trying to stay afloat.

Corzine broke his promise to cut property taxes by 40% over 4 years. His 2010 budget has cut Tax Relief for Middle Class Families and irrefutably increased property taxes another 20% since he was sworn in.

Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan and Peter Barnes are part of the Corzine partisan clone administration, going along with those same disastrous policies. They did not stand up against any of Corzine’s tax increases; their answer to solve New Jersey’s bad fiscal management was to raise our taxes to fill in the void left by over 200,000 lost jobs.

Through the combined efforts of both Assemblymen, they both voted to increase taxes for the citizens of New Jersey and the 18th district by over $10 billion dollars, even in the face of a deteriorating economy. When they exclaim they are representing the people of the district, their voting record belies that fact.

They voted in favor of a $400 million payroll tax hike, eliminating $100 million in property tax deductions, an increase of $68.9 million in Real Estate Commission Fees, and $903 million in favor of an increased income tax.

On top of that to add insult to injury, as if the outrageous Realty Transfer Tax isn’t already high enough, Diegnan and Barnes voted to increase this tax by $62 million on the state level, and another $22 million on the county level. Let’s not forget the $8 million tax on your lottery winnings, just on the upshot you may actually win enough get you back on your feet.

Governor, I wouldn’t classify the current state of affairs as real progress for New Jersey.

For eight years the people of New Jersey have seen their property taxes increase over 55%, their tax dollars wasted, jobs leaving our state and their property tax relief eliminated, and it still isn’t enough. Jon Corzine and a Democratic controlled State Assembly have given us the highest property taxes in the nation. Perhaps we need an appointed committee to review outdated taxes, or purge old tax laws. Tax upon tax, bill upon bill, regulation over regulation is not conducive to New Jersey’s economy and the current numbers bear this out.

It appears that it is all about defending the interests of extravagant spending and refilling the state purses, than about protecting families, their homes and their jobs. Clearly statistics show raising taxes is not the answer.

The Governor’s answer is for everyone to pack up and move to North Dakota is pure arrogance, for the majority of citizens in this state that is not an option.

We have an upside down economy with unemployment growing faster than job creation, jobs and business are crucial to our economy. New Jersey needs bring back industry, employment and allow small business to grow in this state. Without jobs, unemployment will rise along with foreclosures.

Trenton needs to assess the immediate problem by bringing business back into the state, not by chasing them out.

Raising taxes may help fill the state nooks and crannies, but does nothing to assist those on the edge of having nothing, or those who are already there.

Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

Diegnan Joins Corzine in a Negative Smear Campaign

2009-09-10T10:18:00.001-04:00

Assemblyman Can't Stand on the Issues So He Resorts to Mudslinging

SOUTH PLAINFIELD- District 18 Assembly candidates Joe Sinagra and Bob Jones today responded to the negative telephone "push poll" being conducted by Assemblyman Patrick Diegnan (D-South Plainfield).

Assembly candidate Bob Jones, a member of the South Plainfield Board of Education, responded that, "Like Jon Corzine, Patrick Diegnan can't run a campaign on his record because his past 7 years in Trenton have consisted of votes for higher taxes and a cloud of ethical controversies. Diegnan has sunk to a new low by assailing 18 year-old high school students in his latest mudslinging attack."

Assembly candidate Joe Sinagra, the former Helmetta Council President, added, "Patrick Diegnan has to launch a negative smear campaign because he wants to hide from his record of raising taxes by $8.32 billion while in Trenton. Like Governor Corzine, Diegnan doesn't want voters to know that he has forced over 200,000 jobs out of New Jersey and raised property taxes almost 20 percent."

The American Association of Political Consultants considers "push polling" to be an activity that "corrupts or degrades the practice of political campaigning."

Both Sinagra and Jones are calling for Diegnan to apologize to the students of South Plainfield High School and are calling on his running mate, Assemblyman Peter J. Barnes III (D-Edison), to denounce push polling in the spirit of an issue-oriented campaign.

Sinagra and Jones are running a grassroots campaign in the Middlesex-based 18th Legislative District, which includes East Brunswick, Edison, Helmetta, Metuchen, South Plainfield, South River, and Spotswood.

Health Care, another Clunker program?

2009-08-23T10:00:00.004-04:00

I agree with Dana Perino of Fox News.

Now that the Democrats control every office in Washington, the obligation is theirs to enthuse and lead on key reforms they want to pass. Yet they seem to get so offended when someone wants to know how the legislation will affect them and their families.

If they want to get support, there are some questions that need answering. People want to know how the bill will change their personal health care coverage, how much will it really cost, how are we going to pay for this program, and what the benefits will be for them.

The Congressional Budget Office put forth that the House bill will cost over $1 trillion dollars for the first ten years, that it will only cover a fraction of the uninsured, and that taxes are likely to be raised across the board.

Of course when the CBO puts out a message like that, Americans are going to start to have questions, they start packing town hall meetings, calling their Congressman, are more interested in the debates, and asking more questions.

The problem is the Democrats can’t answer questions to their own plan, and when questioned on it they become irate and start blaming someone else. First it was Republicans against reform, next it was Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, when that didn’t work they started blaming journalists, now the blame is on the insurance companies.

The ironic part of this is that the Democrats talked about the affordability and accessibility of health insurance in New Jersey. They appropriated millions of additional dollars to provide health insurance to low and moderate income state residents through the Family Care program. At the same time they imposed new taxes on health insurance providers, the cost of which is being passed on to policyholders, making insurance even less affordable.

You can’t sell Health Care reform if you haven’t read the bill.

Look at the bill, and then ask your representative to explain it. The majority of people like their healthcare, they do not want higher taxes to pay for this proposal.

If the sales representative can’t sell a product they know nothing about it and can’t give you a straight answer, how can you intelligently respond to those who want answers? In the rush to get this bill out to mainstream America, the only one you can target is the one who came up with the marketing plan in the first place.

Also how long is it going to take to get the health insurance companies their payments? Government can't even pay car dealers for the clunker program in a timely manner because of all the beauracratic red tape, and the American public is supposed to accept the fact, that their health coverage is in good hands?

Remember the Yugo?

Joe Sinagra
18th District Assembly Candidate

Can NJ afford four more years of bad news?

2009-08-20T10:31:00.004-04:00

New Jersey's unemployment rate rose to 9.3% in August, the highest it has been in the last 25 years.

While New Jersey gained 13,000 private sector jobs last month, the first job growth in the state in 17 months, the economy remains so poor that another 7,100 people lost their jobs. New Jersey lost another 3,100 jobs in June.

Corzine is trying to spin the 13,000 increase in jobs as if he had something to do with it. His latest email states “13,000 private sector jobs were added last month because of our business-friendly policies.” Say what? He extended the 4% corporate tax surcharge, raised taxes 25 % on liquor, and picked Weinberg as his LG.

By picking Loretta Weinberg as his Lieutenant Governor he has made the Democratic Ticket even more anti-Taxpayer than it ever was. Weinberg has voted for every tax increase that ex-Governor Jim McGreevey wished for and every tax increase that Jon Corzine proposed. She has been a rubber stamp for tax increases the whole time she has been in the legislature and she will continue to be the poster girl for higher taxes while in the Governor’s office. Weinberg was never interested in cutting government expenditures or standing up to government unions; instead she has consistently supported ever increasing government.

With the passing of a $29 billion budget it increased taxes by almost $1 billion, eliminated property-tax deductions for the wealthiest residents and shaved billions from health care, higher education and other programs.

When New Jersey Treasurer David Rousseau was asked the question “In your observation, do you feel New Jerseyans are overtaxed?” Rousseau incredulously answered “No.”

Under Corzine, New Jersey’s state/local tax-burden percentage has gone from the third-highest in the country to the highest in the country.

Even before the recession Corzine condoned the state’s wasteful spending, the union pandering, giving public employees benefits the taxpayers can’t afford and refusing to take the necessary steps to end the hidden tax of public corruption. All part of his campaign which he promised to put an end to.

These tax increases have destroyed New Jersey’s economic and business environment, driven thousands of residents and businesses out of New Jersey and have made New Jersey one of the most unaffordable states in which to live.

Since the beginning of the recession in December 2007, New Jersey has lost 150,100 jobs.

While Jon Corzine is claiming he created 13,000 jobs, by the actions he has taken since his inauguration the facts speak differently. Faced with an unemployment toll that rose to 9.2 percent last month, the Corzine administration spin is that the loss of jobs in June was the smallest since the recession began. Tell that to the thousands of unemployed who are standing in a line that isn’t moving.

A combined total of eight years of McGreevey and Corzine burdening business with taxes, fees, and regulation has not only chased many business’s out of New Jersey, but has taken over 100,000 people with them.

The facts are:
• Since 2002, more than 230,000 people have left New Jersey.
• Over the last seven years, property taxes, on average, have risen almost 55 percent statewide and by 20 percent since Corzine took office.
• The current budget increased taxes on payroll, income, cigarettes, alcohol, lottery winnings and increasing DMV fees, for a total of $1 billion.
• The current budget will do nothing to balance next years obligations, and will only pay last years debt.

Unless New Jersey starts creating policies to bring industry back, the unemployed will still be standing in a line that not going to move.

Corzine can spin it however he wants, but bad news is bad news, and four more years of Corzine can only mean four more years of bad news.

Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

Job Growth Vital to NJ Economy

2009-07-31T22:46:00.003-04:00

Unemployment in New Jersey is at its highest level in 32 years, the past 6 months of job losses have exceeded anything we've experienced and the number of long-term unemployed is at an all-time high since World War II. Once the recovery begins, many unemployed looking for jobs will realize that jobs as good as the ones they lost are almost impossible to find since layoffs in this recession are permanent and not temporary.

Taking into consideration the current 9.5 % unemployment, plus another 8% that are no longer collecting and off the statistical radar screen we are looking at 18% to 20% unemployment. I expect unemployment to reach somewhere around 11 to 12% before it stabilizes. Even when this recession is over, the amount of job losses have exceeded job creation. The road to recovery will be a long one before anyone realizes the recession is over.

Many of our residents are finding their benefits coming to an end, and left with nowhere else to turn.

Many of the unemployed will find that their previous jobs have been eliminated; new wages will not come close to prior earnings.

Since 2001, New Jersey has had a 23 percent decline in manufacturing, losing 96,200 jobs. The increased corporation business tax liability imposed in 2002, requiring a business to pay a surcharge equal to 4% of the amount of the corporation’s tax liability. Since the recession began in December 2007, New Jersey had shed 155,000 jobs. By the end of 2008, more than thirty-one corporations moved to Pennsylvania taking 21,000 jobs with them, along with $13 billion in income and wealth. Due to the increase in business tax 100,000 jobs were lost.

New Jersey needs to put an end to its stifling business practices. We need to eliminate the 4% corporate tax, rollback the 25% tax on wine and spirits, and find ways to help small business owners with affordable healthcare for their families and workers.

Since 2003 until now our legislation has put forth and implemented the payroll tax for paid family leave, the sales tax increase along with the sales tax expansion. There was the corporation business tax, increases on the realty transfer tax, casino taxes, hotel/motel bed and breakfast occupancy tax, the elimination of disallowance of depreciation deduction, elimination of deductibility of net operating expenses, taking away ability of a business to deduct from their taxes an amount for the depreciation of equipment and machinery. Also, the Corporation Business Tax and Gross Income Tax from the Federal Deduction of Qualified Production Activities Income, which increases taxes for certain New Jersey businesses by decoupling New Jersey’s Corporation Business Tax (CBT) and Gross Income Tax (GIT) from the federal manufacturer tax deduction.

The above mentioned taxes are only a few out of many penalties that have been detrimental to the decline of business in New Jersey since 2002. Is it any wonder jobs are leaving the state for greener pastures?

Revenue that would have gone to the business owners to expand and create jobs, raises, payroll, and hiring is being swallowed up by state greed to replace the fiscal mismanagement of years gone by. Trenton needs top take a step back and take a look as what must be done to reverse the trend and replace lost revenue. Raising taxes in a recession is not the answer, having an adverse affect.

Trenton must find a solution to encourage business growth, so we are in a position as the effects of the recession diminish, business growth will be able to outpace job demand. Lacking jobs, the market can only perpetuate more of the same.

Corruption in NJ Government, a license to steal?

2009-07-31T07:41:00.007-04:00

Public confidence has been shaken in current NJ administration, with more arrests said to be made very soon.

A ten year investigation, is this organized crime in state government?

Money laundering, body parts, bribes, and a list of more to come. Is it any wonder the citizen’s of this state are cynical about politicians.

Is this what Corzine's rebirth of ethic standards meant? Guilt by association has been taken to a new level.

However, on the bright side the citizen’s of NJ will be able to rest a little easier knowing a settlement was reached on Springsteen tickets.

Would this be a good time to start considering term limits?

Joe Sinagra

Healthcare, The Sky is not Falling

2009-07-23T21:53:00.006-04:00

We do need healthcare reform, but it should be looked into at a slower pace. This is a start to what could be good for all of America. There is no crisis, no immediate danger of the health care system collapsing.

We cannot pass increased costs on to the business owners and corporations. Government cannot tell citizens they must carry health care insurance or they will be penalized. America’s 47 million uninsured people would be required to purchase a health policy or face financial penalties. To ask citizens to make another choice in what bill to pay at the end of the month would be creating an undo hardship on them.

All Americans deserve access to affordable health care, but to increase taxes during an economic recession, especially on small businesses, is not the right way to accomplish that goal. To mandate that individuals face penalties during hard times is a bitter pill to swallow.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 H.R. 1 will increase the number of those dependent on the Federal Government for health care by about 8.2 million. By creating a panic, insisting that it must be done now or else, is throwing good money after bad, making a bad situation worse.

Reforming Medicare and Medicaid would be a good start. In 2007, 32.7 billion dollars was spent on improper Medicaid payments. Instead of reforming the program, there is a formula that actually rewards states for driving up their health care costs. Senior citizens would be asked to pay higher premiums for Medicare drug coverage.

Government is going to spend $634 billion on health care, half of that will be paid by new taxes. Experts predict the costs would be closer to $1 trillion dollars.

Republicans are not blocking the healthcare plan. If all the GOP Congressman voted against it, there are enough Democrats to vote in the affirmative to push this bill through.

I believe by pushing this plan through before it is ready, will lengthen the recession.

If the recession is to improve as some are predicting by the middle of 2010, there is plenty of time to put together a health plan without being hasty. To ratify a rushed healthcare plan before all aspects and resulting consequences are looked at, will certainly cost us much more than we bargained for.

This is one plan that must be read from cover to cover before it is voted on. A haphazard decision would be catastrophic.

Jobs necessary for the survival New Jersey

2009-07-12T14:54:00.003-04:00

It is costing us $100 million a day in stimulus interest. Unemployment has gone from 8.5% to over 10%.

The $29 million budget the Governor signed will not bring relief to an already suffering working class.

Unfunded pensions, health care benefits for retirees are costing every man women and child left in the state about $3800. With the new budget, we are using new debt to pay down the old debt.

A year from now, we will be looking to another increased budget, because the current budget does nothing to prepare for New Jersey’s future. How in the world, during a recession can you justify raising taxes on an already struggling working middle class?

New Jersey is already unaffordable to many of its citizens, and has caused many of them to flee the state. Friends, neighbors, relatives with the hope of something better across the state line.

The exodus from New Jersey began in 2002. At that time 23,000 more people moved out of the state than moved into it, increasing in 2006 72,000, escalating to 196,000 by the end of 2008. The dampening of the housing market in recent months, however, could lead some people to stay.

To some of the families I’ve talked to in the district, this budget will devastate them.

This recession had nothing to do with NJ’s economy; it's due to eight years of overspending that has brought us to where we are. Revenues averaged about 3%, but spending continued at an average of 7 to 9%.

Many jobs continue to leave New Jersey, taking residents with them. Thousands of jobs in the telecommunications industry are gone; New Jersey lost 8,400 high technology jobs between 1990 and 2005. Since 2003 the pharmaceutical industries have been relocating, and less than 14 percent of the country’s pharmaceutical jobs remain in New Jersey.

The loss of state resources, families, jobs are a direct results that contributed to the loss in the states economy, reducing consumer expenditures, employment, and state taxes.

To create jobs, as a state we need to lead if we want this economy brought back to an enviable status.

Let’s use some of that the $18 billion dollar stimulus not included in the budget to create permanent jobs.

I propose as a start, the elimination of the 4% corporate tax, as an incentive to bring business back into New Jersey.

Throughout the state there are warehouses, buildings, industrial parks that are run down and abandoned, in areas such as Camden, Trenton, Newark, and South Plainfield.

Let’s tell business that we want them back, asking them to invest in these areas rather than building new facilities, give them a 20 year tax renewal option. The first 5 years there would be no property tax payments, ten years 35%, fifteen years 75%, and at the twentieth year it is open for renegotiation. Or a possible tax rotation plan where at year twenty it would go to 100%, and the following year would start at 25, 50, 75, and 100%.

They would not be penalized for property improvements; they would be given tax incentives for going “green”. The recycling of water, solar energy, generation of electricity are some areas business could be rewarded for their innovativeness.

Any corporations relocating to these areas would be required to hire at least 30% of their workforce from within their respective area, thereby helping local employment. Any employee hires over 500, corporations would receive tax incentives or credits.

By relocating to these areas, it would create construction jobs, help the housing market, and bring revenue into surrounding towns from the money that will be spent by the ensuing labor force.

By reducing unemployment, creating employer incentives, eliminating bureaucratic red tape for business owners, all will have an immediate effect on increased revenue to New Jersey.

Although not perfect as specifics would be worked out, and unless critics have a better plan, it is a start. We need a plan to invite business back to New Jersey and give them a reason not to leave.

Increasing taxes to make up for lost revenue is detrimental to New Jersey’s economy. Cutting needed programs, and giving the working class less pocket money weakens our economy even more.

As good as they are intended to be, we can no longer afford to throw money away on open space, park projects, the study of cranberry bogs, when the people of this state don’t have the funds or the means to take advantage of them.

We will never balance a budget without financial prudence, jobs are essential to New Jersey’ future.

Joe Sinagra

NJ 18th District Assembly Candidate

1 Dead After Freight Train Derails Northwest of Chicago

2009-06-21T17:28:00.006-04:00

(click on the above Headline for story link)
1 Dead After Freight Train Derails Northwest of Chicago - ...
Jun 20, 2009 ... 1 Dead After Freight Train Derails Northwest of Chicago, A Tank car loaded with thousands of gallons of highly flammable ethanol exploded.

In 2006 when I ran for Congress, (before the increase in gasoline prices) my statement regarding fuel was that we must find other fuel alternatives to preserve our future. Natural gas reserves are about equal or slightly less than oil reserves. Oil production peaked in the 1970’s and has been declining since.

Thirty-five years ago, the United States produced 9.4 million bpd of crude; today, it produces only about 4.7 million, importing over 55% today. World reserves are declining also, as supplies diminish, prices will continue to rise.

I had said, "We can no longer afford to ignore the issue, this will dramatically influence the economy in the US and abroad, we are heading for a major and financial crisis if we do not act responsibly now. Oil production will remain the same but due to population growth, demand will outpace the production. This will cause prices to skyrocket and oil-dependant economies to deteriorate."

"Here it is 2007 and nothing has changed other than the price of fuel costs increasing. In my congressional debates I had said although I am for the environment, at some point we must start looking into domestic drilling if we are not to become dependent of foreign oil entities. My opponent a “rocket scientist” said that he was against drilling but offered no viable alternative, nor an immediate solution. My suggestion was that we continue to look for alternative renewable sources, but until we find that alternative, drilling would give us the time to pursue alternative research. I don’t believe ethanol is the answer."

I wrote an article on Homeland Security and Chemical Plants. I mentioned the volatility of Ethanol. I had said at that time ethanol can not be piped and must be transported by truck or rail. How many of these rail cars or trucks are going through our communities? How it effects the safety of our citizens. At the time I wrote my article the chemical industry was self regulated and they are heavy lobbyists and government did not enforce regulation.

The media was so enamored with my opponents views, my opinions and articles were overlooked or ignored.

Picture a scenario of a town with 30,000 residents. An EMT response team with a crew of 10, and three ambulances. In the event of a chemical leak, large scale gas leak, how many hazmat suits are available, with thousands trying to flee, how do we save everyone?

For Immediate Release:

2007
HOMELAND SECURITY
- CHEMICAL PLANTS -

There are approximately 140 Chemical Plants in New Jersey and 15,000 throughout the United States. All with chemicals available for terrorists to use against us as weapons of mass destruction.

A breach in a chemical plant in Chicago would affect 3 million people, another in California has the potential to kill, wound and displace 8,000,000 people.

These statistics are from the Environmental Protection Agency based on chemicals stored in those plants.

We have a plant in Spotswood that stores chlorine, where 1.1 million lives are potentially endangered within 14 miles, and is less than one mile from five schools. About 1 ¼ miles away there is a school in East Brunswick.

A single chlorine tank can lead to 17,500 deaths, 10,000 severe injuries, and 100,000 hospitalizations.

For towns near chemical plants, evacuation is not the solution. Evacuations are for floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes and work well for advance warning systems. In the event of a chemical attack, there would be no advance warning, and evacuation will not work. Prevention, containment, and remediation should be the priorities.

To illustrate the damage that can happen, I will describe in short detail of what happened in Bhopal India. It was in 1984 that Union Carbide India accidentally released 40 tons of methyl isocyanate into the air, killing 7,000 immediately. In trying to escape the gas, the transportation system in the city collapsed and many people were trampled in their attempt to distance themselves from the danger. The escaped gases injured anywhere from 150,000 to 600,000 people, 15,000 of whom died later. None of the six safety systems designed for containment were operational, and during the night while people were sleeping, they were awakened with burning eyes, noses, and throats. Coughing up blood while trying to run away and losing control of their bladders and bowels. Within hours, thousands lay dead in the street.

The Bhopal incident should have been a warning of the potential havoc that is caused without the proper checks and balances.

In 2004 a chlorine leak in south western China forced the evacuation of 150,000 people and left nine dead, and the previous December forced the evacuation of 60,000 people.

On January 6, 2005 in Graniteville South Carolina, chlorine leaking from a derailed tank car caused the evacuation of 5,000 people, killing nine people and injuring hundreds.

As recently as August 25 of 2006, 23 people in Dover Delaware were sent to the hospital, due to a styrene leak from a defective valve on a tanker rail car at a Dow site.

Police are not equipped with the proper resources to respond to a chemical emergency, nor are there sufficient emergency personnel to save any reasonable amount of lives as described in the Bhopal incident. Our first responders need training and equipment if they are to be able to do their jobs effectively. Hospitals, fireman, police, rescue squads need to be prepared for a large scale chemical attack or chemical release. Funding to provide doctors and nurses the proper course of action and facilities as to where citizens will go for treatment. I suggest appointing a State Homeland Hospital Medical Director who will oversee all medical facilities, coordinate and train personnel to handle a large scale crisis.

In just our local communities, we have chemicals such as vinyl acetate in Dayton, titanium tetrachloride in Edison, 360,000 lbs. of chlorine at a plant in Spotswood, vinyl acetate monomer in Somerset, and methyl chloride in Old Bridge. The Middlesex County Utilities Authority in Sayreville has 720,000 lbs. of chlorine on site as registered with the EPA.

I propose that all chemical plants, pesticide manufacturers, paint manufacturers, and refineries are required to do a thorough background check on employees, mandatory drug screening. Outside contracted employees must have clearances before working on or entering any chemical site, all outside vendor vehicles searched before entering a plant. All necessary agencies are to receive notification in regards to the transportation of chemicals to and from plants. There are many plants with aging systems waiting for an accident. Twice a year the containment and security of those chemicals need to be subject to required inspections, including the transportation means that are used. Standardization and guidelines need immediate legislation for the monitoring of spills, leaks, breach of security, means of transportation, safety of equipment, and the routes used. Required inspections of vessels used to hold the chemical, the safety of the railways, the valves and shutoffs used to control and contain these chemicals. Regulation of trucks and truck routes need to be looked at in the transportation of Ethanol, which is highly volatile product.

All schools must be required to submit a contingency plan for procedures, made available to the public in the event of a chemical emergency, whether it is a lockdown or evacuation.

It has been at least four years since a Senate panel unanimously passed a bill to create security standards for the nation’s chemical plants; Congress has yet to agree on mandatory safeguards.

When officials tell us, we have it under control, we must ask how. What plan of action do they have to protect the citizen’s and children of those in proximity to those plants? Getting in your car and driving across the highway is not the answer.

It is imperative that we apply for The Department of Homeland Security Funding Formula, so we have the necessary equipment and training. Funding that is based on risk, not on the parties controlling local government.

National Security funds were distributed on a partisan basis, funds not based on risk! When funds are distributed based on party affiliation over lives in our communities, we need to question the rationale behind those disbursements.

Funds are wasted when they are used for Gyms, Bowflex equipment, TV sets, monies wasted on frivolity when accountability isn’t required on how the money was spent.

For the year 2006 the applicants on the list of eligibility are Elizabeth, Jersey City and Newark with a 10 mile buffer around the area. The 12th District did not make that list.

When our assembly has time to legislate that our state dirt will be Downer soil, over the protection of lives, we have a definite problem.

There seems to be a nonchalant attitude regarding chemical plants, and we are fooling ourselves if we are lulled into thinking this could never happen in our society or our local communities. We are living in different times, the world is changing, and we must stop acting as if it will not happen here.

We as a country, scour the world looking for weapons of mass destruction. We are inviting trouble when we allow biological and chemical weapons right in our own backyard, and then ask our government not to place controls over the chemical plants that use them. There are too many lives at risk to ignore the makings of a disaster in our communities; it is only a matter of time. We should not need to wait until a catastrophe happens in our communities. Action is needed now.

We have provided the bomb; all that’s needed is a fuse.

Joseph Sinagra
18th District Assembly Candidate

Realty Transfer Fee too much for sellers

2009-06-21T09:12:00.003-04:00

Since 2003, this tax has increased over 80 percent, and with the added municipal home sales tax, it would make it 103 percent since 2003. - Joe Sinagra

I recently read a letter to the editor pointing out that many people are unaware of the sales tax on homes.

I read it with intense interest because I'd love to sell my home and move away from New Jersey … move far away. But now the times do not favor sellers — prices have dropped because of the economy, banks are not giving mortgages because they have suffered tremendous losses from uncreditworthy borrowers, and mortgage interest rates have begun to inch higher. So, I'm stuck.

To think that there's a tax, a stealth sales tax, on top of all the other expenses in selling a home, is just too, too much to contend with.

This Realty Transfer Fee (RTF) that the letter writer, Joe Sinagra, a state Assembly candidate for the 18th District, discusses, is an insidious tax. It was supposed to help support the recording of real-estate transactions. I assume books, records and maps are all brought up to date. Well, how much money does it take in this age of the computer to record real-estate transactions? The costs should have gone down.

Sinagra points out that since 2003 when Jim McGreevey was governor, the state increased the tax more than 80 percent, and municipalities increased it 103 percent. There's no end to it. Reverse the RTF and end it. The county clerk's office, where all these transactions get recorded, did not become modern and efficient.

The state and the municipality receive more and more from the sale of the home just through normal growth and development. The population of New Jersey in 1960 was 6,066,782 — the RTF began in 1968. The population of New Jersey in 1970 was 7,171,112, an 18 percent increase. The population of New Jersey in 2008 was 8,698,879, a 21 percent increase over 1970 and a 43 percent increase over 1960. That means more homes, many more. That means an increasing revenue stream.

Even if you live out of state and own a home in New Jersey, you are still subject to a 2 percent fee. How about people who liveout of state and inherit a home in New Jersey? More revenue.

What interests this governor is more tax revenue, all at the expense of the individual sellers. Sinagra points out that 57 percent of the tax money goes to the state's general fund; 19 percent, state's Extraordinary Aid Account (EEA); 18 percent, Neighborhood PNRF; 18 percent to the counties for general use; 7 percent, Public Health Priority Fund. Not one of those funds is for the recording of real-estate transactions.

If the government is collecting money for a specific purpose and then it decides to divert the money to other areas, then it's time for us to decide to vote against the current officials in government, like the incumbents.

Cheryl Bass
Spotswood

The $395,455 Train Ride

2009-06-17T20:30:00.003-04:00

We are exporting our jobs and money away from our state. We are watching tax funds ebbing away to boost our neighbors economy. I believe our politicians are looking in the wrong direction in building a second rail tunnel to New York, with another proposal to expand a rail tunnel which would transport New Jersey residents and drop them off in Philadelphia.

These tunnels are going to be subsidized by New Jersey. The spending of our tax dollars to move people out of the state makes no sense at all. Take the $3 billion dollars and use it to benefit the people of New Jersey, not New York and Philadelphia.

A selling point to justify this project is that 22,000 cars will be eliminated from the roadways. Dividing 22,000 into the expected $8.7 billion project, it would cost $395,455.00 for each vehicle removed from the roads, so drivers can take the train to work in New York City and spend their money there. This makes no economic sense.

Should we be spending money just to make it easier for people to get to New York City and make their economy stronger? Should we help Philadelphia prosper? They should be building rail systems so their citizens would have an easier commute to New Jersey.

Use the $3 billion dollars to make New Jersey a place where businesses want to relocate to, instead of using money on a tunnel that will siphon much needed New Jersey cash.

We have industrial parks in our state begging for business.

Let’s start by eliminating the proposed 4% business tax, tell business we want them back. Ask them to build in Industrial Parks in areas such as Camden, Trenton, Newark, Edison and South Plainfield instead of building a new facility. They would receive 5 years tax free, with a 20 year option. After 5 years, taxes would go to 25%, 15 years 75% and open to renegotiation after 20. Any green energy products used such as solar power, recycling of water usage, etc. they would be subsidized. They won’t be penalized for any property improvements. Thirty per cent of their work force must come out of those districts. Any employee over 500, business would receive a tax credit or incentive. Advertise to the business community our gates are open and we want them back.

Although it may not be a perfect plan, we need to start thinking outside the box on how we are going to put our citizens back to work, and grow New Jersey’s economy.

Use the $3 billion in stimulus money to fund business, hire our unemployed, keep existing business from leaving, keep money in the State of New Jersey to stimulate our economy, rebuild our infrastructure and transportation system in our state, would generate much needed income, and would be a boon for real estate. New Jersey should be in the envious position of New York and Philadelphia business wanting to relocate here, and their people commute and spend money in New Jersey.

Using New Jersey cash to create a better economy for our neighbors is not advantageous to improving our sorry state of affairs.

Used wisely, stimulus funds would benefit our economy for years to come.

Joe Sinagra
18th District Assembly Candidate

Many are unaware of sales taxes on homes

2009-06-10T22:31:00.001-04:00

Another form of taxation to the homeowners of New Jersey is the Realty Transfer Fee (RTF), pursued aggressively under Jim McGreevey and continued by Jon Corzine as an additional source of revenue.

Many of you who count on the profit of your home to move into another or out of state, are hit with this regressive tax, also known as New Jersey's exit tax.

The homeowner is penalized on all their years of hard work and investment that was put into that home, money taken from the equity that was built into the sale of that home.

You as a homeowner have to pay a tax for the privilege of selling your home.

Also, on a foreclosure, a realty transfer fee must be paid on the remaining balance of the mortgage, by the purchaser.

The home sales tax due on a home that sells for $356,700 is $2,800; a $600,000 home would have to pay $5,185. The New Jersey State Legislature is considering further increases to the home sales tax by permitting individual municipalities to establish their own fees in addition to those charged by the state. With the extra tax, the home sales tax bill would increase 13 percent. Many who sell their home are not informed of this tax, and are surprised when hit with the additional fees taken from the profit at the time of closing.

Since 2003, this tax has increased over 80 percent, and with the added municipal home sales tax, it would make it 103 percent since 2003.

With the higher realty transfer fee increase imposed in 2004, there was an 81 percent increase, with the state general fund receiving 57 percent of the total realty transfer fee, 19 percent for the state's Extraordinary Aid Account (EEA), 18 percent to the Neighborhood PNRF, 18 percent to the counties for general use, and 7 percent for the counties' Public Health Priority Fund, with a portion dedicated to affordable housing.

The 1968 fee in the beginning was revenue collected to cover the costs of recording real estate transactions. Having risen four times since then, increasing substantially each time, it is now used to fund general state expenditures, neighborhood preservation, public health, and shore protection.

Is Gov. Corzine telling us that state government will now keep all of what they receive from the realty transfer tax, with the municipalities now able to charge a tax to make up for what they won't be getting back from the state? Would this be considered double taxation?

This is a huge sum of revenue to the state. Was anyone keeping tabs on how it was spent? Or were the funds escalating year after year, just because there was an eternal, never-ending flow of tax revenue?

Has the state decided to keep all of the money as another alternative to be used toward balancing the budget?

This is one more tax burden that needs to be brought under control, and the monies collected must be accounted for.

Joe Sinagra
Candidate
N.J. 18th District State Assembly Helmetta

Time to Redline Corzine

2009-05-31T22:05:00.003-04:00

If Corzine were serious about bringing the state in order he would have phased out the pension system, raised the retirement age for state employees to the same as those in the private sector (no retiring before the age of 62), stop the borrowing without voter approval, and eliminate the corporate business tax, allowing industry to grow in New Jersey.

Instead he has raised taxes over 55% on just about everything imaginable since taking office. The 1% sales tax increase did nothing to aid the taxpayers of this state, and now the rebates are being taken away. He tried getting the taxpayers to vote for ½% dedicated strictly to property tax on the ballot, thereby ending any chance of property tax reform in the future. We already know his history on dedicated funds, such as taking the $4 million from the EMT fund to balance the deficit, as one example. Corzine had proposed the closure of 9 state parks to save $4.5 million, changed his mind and decided to build an $87 million park by using money from the Corporate Fund Tax.

The legislature is now considering if municipalities will be allowed to charge a local sales tax on real estate transfers when you sell your home.

With over 630,000 people out of work, business moving out of state taking workers and much needed revenue with them, more foreclosures predicted on the horizon, can we afford four more years of tax increases? Even should there be a slight climb in the economy, how long will it be before we get

Any state spending should be put on the shelf, maintaining necessary current projects on the books without further increases.

Taking more money out of the very pockets from those who are needed to nourish the economy, keeping business from growing, taking money from dedicated funds, and placing increased taxes on all to replace the states wasted spending and mismanagement is just plain irresponsible.

According to a Monmouth University/Gannett New Jersey poll, Governor Corzine has failed to get a grip on government finances.

It’s time to draw a line through the bureaucratic waste; it’s time to redline Corzine.

One last kick in the butt before you leave

2009-05-23T12:58:00.003-04:00

Another form of taxation to the homeowners of New Jersey is the Realty Transfer Fee (RTF), pursued aggressively under Jim McGreevey and continued by Jon Corzine as an additional source of revenue.

Many of you, who count on the profit of their home to move into another or out of state, are hit with this regressive tax. Also known as New Jersey’s exit tax, one last kick in the butt before you leave.

The homeowner is penalized on all their years of hard work and investment that was put into that home, money taken from the equity that was built into the sale of that home.

You as a homeowner have to pay a tax for the privilege of selling your home.

Also, on a foreclosure a realty transfer fee must be paid on the remaining balance of the mortgage, by the purchaser.

The Home Sales Tax due on a home that sells for $356,700 is $2,800; a $600,000 home would have to pay $5,185. The New Jersey State Legislature is considering further increases to the Home Sales Tax by permitting individual municipalities to establish their own fees in addition to those charged by the state. With the extra tax, the Home Sales Tax bill would increase 13%. Many who sell their home are not informed of this tax, and are surprised when hit with the additional fees taken from the profit at the time of closing.

Since 2003 this tax has increased over 80%, and with the added municipal Home Sales Tax would make it 103% since 2003.

With the higher Realty transfer fee increase imposed in 2004 there was an 81% increase, with the state general fund receiving 57% of the total realty transfer fee, 19% for the state’s Extraordinary Aid Account (EEA), 18% to the Neighborhood PNRF, 18% to the counties for general use, and 7% for the counties Public Health Priority Fund, with a portion dedicated to affordable housing.

The 1968 fee in the beginning was revenue collected to cover the costs of recording real estate transactions. Having risen four times since then, increasing substantially each time it is now used to fund general state expenditures, neighborhood preservation, public health, and shore protection.

Is Governor Corzine telling us that state government will now keep all of what they receive from the realty transfer tax, with the municipalities now able to charge a tax to make up for what they won’t be getting back from the state. Would this be considered double taxation?

This is a huge sum of revenue to the state, was anyone keeping tabs on how it was spent? Or were the funds escalating year after year, just because there was an eternal never ending flow of tax revenue?

Has the state has decided to keep all of the money as another alternative to be used towards balancing the budget?

This is one more tax burden that needs to be brought under control, and the monies collected must be accounted for.

Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District State Assembly Candidate

Corzine Park

2009-05-06T08:48:00.006-04:00

At the end of 2008, 196,000 families packed their bags, shut off the light switch, and left New Jersey.

The state lost nearly 100,000 jobs during the past year alone and, as of February, its unemployment rate stands at 8.2 percent, and increasing. Add in those who no longer qualify for unemployment benefits, and aren’t even bothering to look for work, it is closer to 15.7% mark.

Over the past seven years State spending has increased 46 percent under Democrat control, State debt stands at $44.5 billion, with the average property tax averaging around $7,000. At $7,045, it remains the highest in the nation, up nearly 20 percent under the Corzine Administration and 55 percent since 2002.

Several months’ back Corzine was talking about closing State Parks then rescinded his thoughts on that. Instead of closing parks he now wants to build one.

Even though the state is saddled with a $7 billion deficit, with many families losing their jobs and homes, left with no medical benefits, the Governor intends to close the $7 billion gap by saddling middle class families with $1 billion in new or increased taxes for 2010.

Is all this new revenue going towards paying down the debt, or to leave us with his future ego legacy of Corzine Park to the tune of $87 million? Not including overrun costs, which could peak at $500 million? If this is not enough to rile up the ire of state taxpayers, I don’t know what will.

Corzine has not followed through on any of his campaign promises, continuing to spend taxpayer money, knowing full well we were heading into a recession. His taxpayer be damned attitude continues, knowing the financial hardships being placed on New Jersey families. $87 million can go a long way in helping ease the pain of the state taxpayers who Corzine proclaims that he knows what they are going through.

If he can take $4 million from the EMT funds to balance the budget, he can divert the Corporation Business Tax towards that entity also. He isn’t using it for its intended purpose anyhow, which was to fund the development and maintenance of parks throughout the state.

Corporate Wall Street fiscal management, I think not. New Jersey burns, while fiddles are being played in the Statehouse.

Taking dedicated funds to pay off another debt is the easy way out, you don't have to work to hard to solve the problem at hand. Taking those funds to finance another project is ludicrous. It just creates another one down the road, which is how we got into this mess.

~ Joe Sinagra
NJ 18th District
State Assembly Candidate

Sea Turtles, Red Snappers & Loons . . . Oh my!

2009-03-15T09:49:00.001-04:00

Drastic measures need to be taken in drastic times. What part do our legislatures not understand?

Don’t get me wrong, some earmarks are good and needed; others in this economy should be shelved. Such as $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa, Alabama receives $800,000 for genetic research on catfish, and Hawaii gets $2 million for the "promotion of astronomy”, $300,000 for migrating loons in Nevada, $3,000,000 for a footbridge in St. Louis, $1,000,000 for red snappers in Florida, $380,000 for a Lighthouse in Maine, and $7,000,000 for sea turtles in Hawaii. There are thousands of more earmarks like this.

People are losing their homes, jobs, and watching their pensions dwindle. Unemployment is the highest we have seen since the Depression, many are watching their benefits run out, who aren’t even considered a statistic once their off the unemployment roles.

This is money that could be used to offset or lower property taxes, create jobs, and extend benefits.

Explain to someone their job couldn’t be saved even though we had $1.7,000,000 for pig odor research, a person who can’t find work why we spent $7,000,000 on sea turtles, or to someone who is living in the street that we had $800,000 for the genetic study of catfish but there wasn’t enough left to lower your property taxes, tell a family who can’t afford to buy medicine for their child but there was enough for a $3,000,000 footbridge.

We can as a country can afford to reduce medical costs, we have the money to lower property taxes, but when funds are spent on unneeded or wasteful projects just so a congressman can say they brought money into the state or their district is ludicrous.

I believe our representatives have it backwards, perhaps if Federal and State funds were to go towards medical, housing, creating jobs, and building the infrastructure of our cities, whatever was left would then be earmarked for pet projects .

In New Jersey $451, 000 for cranberry and blueberry research will not help a large portion of its citizens out of the morass government got us into.

It doesn’t matter whether it’s just the ear or the whole hog, what’s significant is that it’s still pork in spite of what the terminology is.

~ Joe Sinagra

Liberals Bleeding Us Dry One Step at a Time

2009-02-14T10:20:00.006-05:00

Here we go again with the politically correct “High Risk” (poorer), “Low Risk” (wealthier) areas; we wouldn’t want to offend anyone. Currently, there is talk that we may have to pay an additional $20 per vehicle to subsidize the auto insurance for the people who live in “High Risk” areas. Keeping premiums down for motorists living in Newark, Paterson, Jersey City, Camden, Elizabeth, Irvington, Perth Amboy and other “high-risk” insurance towns.

I am incensed, for lack of a better word to use in print. If you live in a “High Risk” area it is either because you can’t afford to live in a “Low Risk” area, don’t have the education to get a better job, or live in a “High Risk” area by choice.

Because you are fortunate enough to own two or more vehicles, you are now going to be penalized. Let’s suppose you are penalized to the point you now have to sell one vehicle to be able to afford the other. If your county owns a fleet of vehicles, will the taxpayers foot the bill to cover the additional $20 on each vehicle?

If you’re living in an area where the vandalism is high, cars are stolen, cars are sprayed with graffiti, and tires are stolen, windshields are smashed; I am not obligated to pay for that problem, which is why I choose not to live in those areas. How many that live in “High Risk” areas even carry insurance? Why and how, are these people driving if they can’t afford the insurance? Maybe we are being asked to subsidize the Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist clause. Perhaps another back door approach to fund insurance for the illegals, once they receive their “driver privilege card”. Now that “State Insurance” is being phased out, could this be a way to get us to pick up the tab and carry those who can’t afford it, thereby eliminating the state from dealing with it?

I have a news flash for Insurance Commissioner Stephen Goldman; if you are in the insurance business, it is considered a “risk business”. Like any other business, if you can’t afford to stay in business, close your doors. The state mandates we must carry insurance, but in many incidences, we wind up paying back our own costs for damages. I work to pay for my insurance, I don’t work so I can pay for someone who earns less or works less.

The “share the wealth” is getting a little out of hand, and this is only the start. How much more is the average taxpayer required to give before they are tapped out?

In part of a speech on February 19, 2008 in Wisconsin, Obama said “In the end, this economic agenda won't just require new money. It will require a new spirit of cooperation and innovation on behalf of the American people. We will have to *learn more, and study more, and work harder. We will be called upon to take part in a shared sacrifice and shared prosperity."

What this means in a nutshell is that in addition to the additional taxes on those making over $250,000 a year, and eliminating the $102,000 wage cap on Social Security taxes, Obama is also proposing that Americans pay additional taxes on oil, coal and natural gas in order to redistribute their wealth to the rest of the world.

Obama's Global Poverty Plan to reduce poverty around the world would include a tax of 0.7% of U.S. gross national product as part of his shared prosperity plan.

This Act would commit the United States to the U.N. that industrialized countries should spend 0.7 percent a year of their gross domestic product on foreign aid. Over the next decade or so, that would work out to $850 billion dollars for American taxpayers.

*Learn more and Study More?
Most of us are living in “Low Risk” areas because that’s why we learned and studied to get ahead so we could move up that rung on the ladder.

*Work Harder?
As far as myself, I held two full time jobs for almost three years; averaging 8 hours sleep for a five day week, and held a part-time job on Saturday, to get what I wanted or needed. How much harder should we now work to “share the wealth” of our hard work to those who would rather receive a handout?

Many of us work hard until we can have somewhat of a comfortable life, but now we are going to be supplementing those who have nothing. What’s next, will we be asked to subsidize “High Risk” heat bills, rent, education, etc, until the pockets of those barely squeaking by in the “Low Risk” areas are empty. How long before “Low Risk” areas have to pay $20 out of their Health Care to subsidize Hospitals in “High Risk” areas? People living in “Low Risk” areas will be taxed until they are forced to move to “High Risk” (poorer) areas. You will work more and more to keep what you have, as more and more is being taken from your pay, to subsidize those who have less. How long before the “liberals’ determine you have more than enough in your savings, that you can share some of it with the less unfortunate?

I’d like to ask Commissioner Goldman what his income is; perhaps he won’t miss the $20. Tell those who have lost jobs, lost their homes, and are barely paying their car insurance as it is, that they may have to fork over an additional $20 because they are fortunate enough to live in a "Low Risk" area. They would love to give up some more of what little they have left.

“The industry challengers say the power to establish rates is up to the Legislature, not the insurance department bureaucrats”, I’m sure the insurance lobbyists will stand back and won’t bother the Legislature while they mull it over.

I don’t mind helping those down on their luck, but I don’t need government telling me where my money is going to be spent.

Is this the next wave of liberalism?

Could it be we are being forced to take the path to socialism, whether we like it or not?

~ Joe Sinagra

We Need Property Tax Relief

2009-02-11T08:47:00.003-05:00

If those in the State Government would make it affordable for people to stay in their homes, the need for more affordable housing would be cut considerably, and would allow for more available units to those who need it.

Seniors on fixed incomes, who have paid off their mortgages, cannot afford the increased taxes, and have had to give up their homes. The elderly are more susceptible to losing their homes, more so than any other group. If they were able to stay in their homes we would not have to construct as many senior affordable housing units.

Most people if given the option would like to stay in their homes, neighborhoods, near their families and friends.

With state aid being cut, municipalities are forced to raise local taxes to make up for the shortfall. It may help the municipalities, but it doesn’t help the taxpayers.

We need to cut property taxes substantially, not the meager tax breaks here and there. Many people when they bought their homes could afford it. It isn’t the mortgages that are strangling many of our homeowners, it is the property taxes. Many homeowners can afford their mortgage payments; they just can’t keep pace with every tax increase that comes along, affecting renters as well.

I believe that is the reason many school budgets are voted down, people can no longer afford to stay in their homes as it is without incurring additional burdens.

When NJ raises other taxes, to replace lost property tax revenue, it’s more of a tax shift than a tax cut. Raising the sales tax to 7% from 6% was supposed to give us property tax relief. Roll the sales tax back to 6%; the so called 1% increase that was to help bring the state’s financial mess stability sure didn’t help, other than to take more money out of the taxpayer’s pocket.

Property taxes have risen 27% since 2000, less than the 41% inflation-adjusted increase in home values, but it's twice as fast as the growth in sales or income taxes. Property taxes now consume a greater share of personal income than any other time in New Jersey’s history. How long before the taxes will equal more than the value of your home? Those who bought homes years ago are finding their property taxes are more than their monthly mortgage payments.

How many times are we going to hear from our legislators, “if elected I will cut taxes?” They should have been doing that all along. Cutting taxes and increasing state spending is not what I call fiscal management.

We can’t continue to raise taxes for the working class, at a rate faster than their ability to pay. If we need to restructure how property taxes are collected, stop talking about it, let’s do it.

Raising taxes, forcing people out of their homes and making it unaffordable to purchase a home is not the answer. It's bad for homeowners, renters, and business.

Flat tax, Fair Tax it doesn’t matter, now is the time to do something, anything but the way it is being done currently, the state needs to put disposable funds back into the pockets of the people if they expect to stimulate the economy. Stop taking money out of the pockets of those who need it the most, give them the capitol to spend, donate, contribute and save. Then, and only then will you see the results of a growing economy.

A real collective bipartisan effort is needed from those in the state capitol, to give relief to the people who put them in office.

By limiting the amount government can tax our property; perhaps with a constitutional cap will we be able to have substantial relief.

Whatever the solution is, we need to act now.

~ Joe Sinagra

Illegal aliens mustn't get this state's welcome mat

2009-01-10T07:53:00.003-05:00

To the Editor:

I agree with your editorial assessment "Don't reward New Jersey illegal aliens".

During my congressional and senate campaigns, my views were pretty close to what was printed in the Home News Editorial on January 07.

What I find ironic is at the time; the press portrayed my position as being too strong against illegal immigration, “over the top” as one put it. At one editorial review, an editor stood up, pointed his finger at me and said “What, are you prejudiced!” It is a matter of what it is costing the citizens of our state and our country, not prejudice. With an economy that is souring, we can no longer afford to picked up added costs and pass them onto the taxpayers.

During my campaigns I spoke of exactly this very thing. I talked about the migration of illegal’s, and the drain on our country’s natural resources, the costs of education, health care, incarceration, schools, etc. Is the “driver privilege card” another back door attempt at amnesty? The card wouldn’t be considered and official ID, but would ensure that illegal immigrants go through the same testing as any other motorist.

Why as a citizen do we need 6 forms of identification to obtain a license, especially when you already have a legal driver license? Many more ramifications are ahead if this is allowed to pass.

As the Home News touched on in their editorial, there was already talk in 2006 about reduced college tuition's for “undocumented Immigrants”. In 2007 higher education costs for our state residents had gone up 35% since 2002. I was critical of the cuts on our universities and colleges, incurring increased costs for in-state students, while giving illegal's low cost or free education.

I had talked about the costs of health care, we as citizens must pay ludicrous amounts to stay healthy? If illegals can't qualify for Medicare coverage, partially paid through our payroll taxes, their costs are then covered through state Charity Care. A mere fraction of hospital care costs, is it a wonder hospitals are closing? Medical offices are throwing away millions upon millions of dollars each year in uncollected billing statements.

Illegal immigration burdens our society with added education costs, the overcrowding of our schools, taxpayer-funded unreimbursed medical outlays for health care, also adding to the shortage of low income housing, and added increase in crime.

There was talk of “undocumented” immigrants paying a fee so they can buy their way to citizenship. Is that a way of supposedly easing the pain of those who stayed in line, applied for citizenship and worked their butts off to be here?

I spoke of the “Dream Act”, which if passed it would grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens and dramatically increase the importation of foreign workers at a time 10 million Americans are looking for jobs and cannot find employment.

In one of my articles I stated, “Until we bring our own house in order, until we decide how we are to continue funding Social Security, fund education, lower taxes; provide affordable health care and housing, for the legal citizens of this country, my stance is no to amnesty. We cannot afford to continue to raise taxes, provide programs and services with the sweat off the backs of legal citizens, to provide care for those who shouldn’t be here.”

To promote the availability of the Driver Privilege program, in 2006 would have cost the taxpayers another $90,000.

Bill A2607 was introduced in 2006, sponsored by Assemblyman Joe Vas -District 19 (Middlesex), Assemblyman Reed Gusciora - District 15 (Mercer), Assemblyman Upendra J. Chivukula - District 17 (Middlesex and Somerset), and Assemblyman Gordon M. Johnson - District 37 (Bergen).

As long as our elected politicians are more concerned about how many votes they can cultivate, more than the rights and interests of legal citizens, nothing will change.

Immigration itself is not the problem, illegal or “undocumented” immigration is.

My personal view is, that once your attain citizen status; you are no longer an immigrant. You are an American.

On my website I surmised, “Any further attempt at Immigration reform won't happen until after the 2008 elections.”

Well . . . Happy New Year!

- Joe Sinagra

Equal Time For Plant Life

2008-12-22T15:54:00.000-05:00

It is a scientific fact that plants "cry in pain" when attacked or damaged by a hungry herbivore. They do have their own "alarm" reaction to tissue damage and, in an effect curiously similar to that in animals.

Plants make a hormone called "Jasmonic acid" when they are in distress. It signals the production of plant-defense compounds -- it works a little like a shot of pain, warning the plant that it is under attack. It can also pass off a vapor and warn nearby plants, a chain reaction that's like a warning signal to other plants.

Plant life is "life" after all and should be treated as such. I do not see any plant demonstrators saying we shouldn't be harvesting plants for medical research, or that nurseries are cramming vegetables into small containers. They are kept in nurseries all their life. There are some species of plants that are going to be "extinct" if we do not act now.

Nurseries are cramming new sprouts and seeds into plant mills and are harvested as soon as they are ripe. They don't even get a chance to blossom. Thousands of seeds are being thrown out or discarded. Who is going to take in all the discarded seeds?

Thousands of fruits and vegetables are just ripped from the vine they grow up on, and thrown away because they aren't good enough.

It is easier to kill a plant because it cannot move, you cannot hear it scream or see it look you in the eye as you drain the life from them. How cruel can it be, to pull them out by their roots and throw them into a pot of boiling water, or a pan full of boiling oil?

Just because plants do not have nervous systems and cannot run away from predators, does that mean they do not experience pain and suffering?

Let little Fauna and Flora live, once all plant life is destroyed, all animal life would cease to exist.

Plants provide us with oxygen; cows provide us with methane gas.

Save a plant today, eat red meat.

A good steak today will save a salad for tomorrow.

Joe Sinagra

Illegal Immigration taking toll on Economy

2008-12-14T11:04:00.002-05:00

Immigrants / migrant workers come here on a work visa, and when it expires its time to go back. No one is saying they can't or shouldn't work here; the problem is they aren’t leaving when their visas expire as no one is enforcing that. For some reason illegals feel they don't have to obey our customs. There are immigrants and there are illegal immigrants, there is a difference. Immigrants, who want to stay, get in line and apply for US citizenship the same way all immigrants in the past did. To me once you become a citizen you are no longer an immigrant. We don't need new laws written, what we need is our government to provide the personnel to enforce our existing immigration laws. We need to make it harder for illegals to receive an education, to get a job, and get medical, that make it less enticing to stay, or more of an incentive to gain citizenship.

The argument that illegals pay taxes depends on what side of the fence (no pun intended) you’re on. If you’re paying $2000 a year in taxes, but receiving $25,000 in benefits it just doesn't balance out. As a citizen I go to the emergency room and have to pay $300, as an illegal with no coverage Charity Care picks up the tab. Which we all pay for and are why our health care costs are so expensive.

Everyone one of us had family who immigrated here. But they worked to become citizens, and didn't expect handouts. My grandfather couldn't speak English and learned it, his first job as a milkman, then as a janitor and then bought his own farm. His proudest day was when he became a citizen.

What we are talking about is ILLEGAL immigrants, why is it so hard to differentiate between the two?

As a kid, as an American, I have worked as a janitor, I have worked in construction, I have bused tables, stocked shelves, washed dishes and as an adult whatever it took to make money to support my family and pay for college. To say there are Americans who won't work these jobs is a crock of bull.

Farmers, construction all want cheap labor that’s OK. Just enforce the work visas for immigrants. Not leaving after your time is up is what makes you illegal. The contractors are screwing themselves and it also affects the unions. When illegals become semi skilled or feel they have enough knowledge to go on their own, who do you think they are going to hire?

They hire their buddies across the border who then come here and cut costs on framing, sheet rocking, masonry, etc. Even though they charge less, they still make more then they would back home. Plus the money is sent back across the border, not going back into the economy that’s giving them a living.

An illegal sends US money home, and they receive the government freebies that come with being an illegal.

I don't receive the free benefits that illegals get and must pay for my kids education, I don't receive it free. I pay for my hospitalization; I don't receive Charity Care from the state. I need to pay taxes to keep my house, I don't receive housing assistance. Not only do Americans pay their own way, they pay higher to support the free programs for illegals.

Then we have the illegals come here and demand rights. If they want rights go back to their country and demonstrate there, but they won't because they will be seen again. It's amazing how illegals can come from nothing and then come here and complain about wanting more.

When the media writes an article about immigrants, they talk about them as if everyone is the same. Talk about illegals, not about immigrants who came here to work hard and become citizens. It is unjust and unfair to grant amnesty to illegals, when millions of immigrants studied and earned the right to come here legally and be called an American.

Illegal immigration causes an enormous drain on public funds. Taxes paid by ILLEGAL immigrants do not cover the cost of services received by them. We will not be able to provide quality education, health care, and retirement security for our citizens if we continue to bring in endless numbers of poor, unskilled immigrants.

Waves of illegal immigrants willing to work at substandard wages and working conditions depresses the wages of American workers, hitting hardest at minority workers and those without high school degrees.

Illegal immigration adds to tremendous population growth with the over crowding of our school classrooms, consuming already limited affordable housing, and straining precious natural resources like water, energy, and forestland

Hospitals receive funded monies to accommodate Charity Care Emergency Medical Assistance. So in essence we are legally paying for services to illegal immigrants

We need to stop giving illegal aliens jobs, education, ID’s and housing.

We need a program to end illegal immigration; that means ensuring that people who enter illegally or overstay their lawful status will not be able to obtain employment, public assistance benefits, public education, public housing, or any other taxpayer-funded benefits.

Yes it will cost us, but the savings of what it is costing the counties, communities and school districts will be astronomical.

It is costing the state’s taxpayers nearly $2.1 billion per year for education, medical care and incarceration due to the illegal alien population residing in New Jersey alone.

Based on Census Bureau data, studies estimate that households headed by illegal aliens used $10 billion more in government services than they paid in taxes. If illegals had been given amnesty, the fiscal deficit at the federal level would grow to nearly $29 billion.

The average illegal household pays more than $4,200 a year in federal taxes, for a total of nearly $16 billion, but they impose annual costs of more than $26.3 billion, or about $6,950 per illegal household.

Amnesty would increase costs because many illegal immigrants are largely unskilled; their tax payments would be very modest. However, once legalized they would have access to many more government services.

Illegal aliens receive free public education; states grant illegal aliens college scholarships and reduced in-state tuition. An estimated 11.7 percent of the K-12 public school students in New Jersey are children of illegal aliens.

Free medical care at taxpayer expense. Those who do not qualify for Medicaid will receive Charity Care paid by the State. Taxpayer-funded, unreimbursed medical outlays for health care provided to the state’s illegal alien population amount to an estimated $200 million a year.

All are great incentives for illegal aliens to enter the US illegally.

Over 17% of our Federal Prison population consists of illegal aliens. The uncompensated cost of incarcerating deportable illegal aliens in New Jersey’s state and local prisons, amounts to about $50 million a year.

Iranians have been caught sneaking over the border. Over 100,000 illegal aliens from the Middle East currently reside in the U.S. If we can’t deal with the influx of illegal aliens in the US, how would we protect ourselves from terrorism?

The costs associated with illegal immigration, Medicaid ($2.5 billion); treatment for the uninsured ($2.2 billion); food assistance programs ($1.9 billion); the federal prison and court systems ($1.6 billion); and federal aid to schools ($1.4 billion).

A proposal requiring employers to fire workers who falsify identity documents, is favored by Seventy-nine percent (79%) of Americans, 74% believe that they should be required to provide documents proving they are in the country legally if a person wants to rent an apartment.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of Americans believe it is very important to improve border enforcement and reduce illegal immigration, a view that is held by 80% of Republicans.

By a margin of (60% to 28%), Americans believe it is more important to gain control of the nation’s borders than to “legalize the status of undocumented workers already living in the United States.”

Sixty-two percent (62%) of Americans support doubling the number of border agents.

A majority of Americans (54%) oppose the current U.S. law that grants automatic citizenship to children of illegal aliens born in the United States, 63% opposes automatic citizenship.

The options we have are simple. We either accept the costs created by the presence of the large pool of illegal aliens, or enforce our laws by reducing the numbers of illegal aliens in the United States.

When we have groups in our nation flying their flag above ours, when we have people entering our country illegally and demanding that we as an American people live by their standards, we will have lost our traditions and our heritage.

Ask any illegal if they would be willing to die to protect our freedom in order to remain a permanent citizen of our country.

We are either American or un-American. Our veterans who fought and died for our rights and individual freedoms will have fought in vain.

How many more can this ship we call America take on, before it capsizes?

Joe Sinagra