| ||||||||||||
‘N.J. Democrats proposes tax hike on those making more than $1M’ Record, Star Ledger/By Statehouse Bureau
‘Education commissioner Schundler dismisses U.S. test
‘N.J. Democrats proposes tax hike on those making more than $1M’
Record, Star Ledger - By Statehouse Bureau Staff May 10, 2010, 2:13PM
TRENTON --Top Democratic lawmakers today proposed raising taxes on so-called true millionaires -- those making more than $1 million a year -- to pay for restored senior property tax rebates and prescription drug benefits.
Democratic legislators, led during a Statehouse news conference by Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) and Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex), said the tax increase would apply to about 16,000 New Jersey residents.
"When the governor talks about shared sacrifice I think we all get it, and we all agree," said Sweeney. "But shared sacrifice means 100 percent of us share in the sacrifice, not 99 percent."
The plan challenged Republican Gov. Chris Christie's pledge against raising taxes in the budget for the fiscal year that starts in July. Christie has argued that a repeat of last year's income tax surcharge -- which affected those with incomes over $400,000 -- would hurt small business owners and slow economic growth.
Christie immediately rejected the Democrats' proposal, accusing them of trying to "pander" to senior citizens with a one-year fix that will harm the state's broader economy. He repeated his vow to veto any tax increase, and characterized the dispute as a "philosophical difference" between himself and foes who want a bigger government.
The governor questioned how lawmakers proposed to raise the same amount of revenue from 16,000 taxpayers that had previously been raised from 63,000 people.
"It's a cute idea, but their math doesn't work," Christie said.
He spoke at a news conference where he introduced a 33-bill package of reforms, including a constitutional amendment capping property tax hikes at 2.5 percent. The only exceptions would be for towns' debt service or if local voters decide to override the cap. Contract awards for public workers like police, firefighters and teachers -- including salaries, health benefits, vacation time and other perks -- also could not increase by more than 2.5 percent a year.
Those changes -- which would require legislative approval -- would truly make a difference for senior citizens who want an affordable state, Christie said.
Democrats said the tax would generate more than $620 million, enough to pay to maintain last year's level of senior rebates and put back prescription drug funding Christie would eliminate. Christie has proposed raising the co-pay for brand-name prescription drugs from $7 to $15, as well as charging a new $310 annual deductible.
"A tax on less than a half percent of the taxpaying New Jerseyans is not a broad-based tax," said Senate Majority Leader Barbara Buono (D-Middlesex). "The governor's refusal to agree to reinstate the millionaire's tax will guarantee that more seniors and the disabled - that thousands of seniors and the disabled - will edge over into poverty. That is perverse logic."
Lawmakers and the governor must approve a budget before July 1. Christie in March proposed a painful $29.3 billion budget that made cuts across almost every aspect of government, including a 75 percent cut to the popular property tax rebate program as well as converting the checks into credits on residents' bills.
Democrats, who have majorities in both houses of the Legislature, say the governor's cuts spared the wealthiest residents.
By Lisa Fleisher and Claire Heininger/Statehouse Bureau
Matt Friedman contributed to this report
‘Education commissioner Schundler dismisses U.S. test ranking N.J. at the top in reading, math’
By Bob Braun/Star-Ledger Columnist, May 10, 2010, 6:45AM
TRENTON -- Good news is always bad news to those who see themselves as "reformers" — no sense reforming what works. So, as state Education Commissioner Bret Schundler begins an effort to change New Jersey schools, he must cope with the bad news of a lot of good news.
Best, or worst, of all are the latest results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP, a testing program of the U.S. Department of Education. It shows New Jersey at the top in achievement in reading and math at the fourth- and eighth-grade levels.
Previous coverage:
• N.J. education chief proposes sweeping school reform, urges NJEA cooperation
• N.J. education chief plans to lay out merit pay, benefits cuts for teachers
• N.J. teachers' union, Schundler cooperate for $400M federal grant
• N.J. education chief warns legislators of voter wrath after school budget defeats
• Schundler: CREATE is going to close, and that's final
• Education chief Bret Schundler faces questions about N.J. school cuts
While New Jersey’s education officials might be expected to embrace good news, Schundler’s spokesman, Alan Guenther, dismissed the results as "irrelevant.’’
Guenther lumped all of public education together as one "wretched system" that fails students. In an e-mailed response, he wrote:
"The NAEP rankings are irrelevant. We should not take solace in the fact that we score well in a wretched system that fails to adequately teach such a high percentage of children.’’
Not everyone agrees, of course. The assessment program is a widely regarded measure of educational progress and, in the past, critics of New Jersey public schools used a poor showing as the sort of bad news that was good news to reformers.
The usual suspects disagree with the state — the New Jersey Education Association, for example, and David Sciarra, executive director of the Education Law Center. They view New Jersey’s high rankings as unalloyed good news, evidence the state’s school aid formula has worked to improve learning. They are critics of any reform that includes Gov. Chris Christie’s proposed $800 million cut in school aid.
But even a neutral-to-supportive observer insists New Jersey’s high rankings on the NAEP can’t be dismissed as "irrelevant." Nor would he agree the state is just part — albeit a successful part — of one big "wretched system.’’
"I think the data produced by the NAEP are legitimate," says Joseph DePierro, dean of the Seton Hall University College of Education. "While, obviously, it doesn’t capture the whole picture, you’re in real trouble if you discount the data."
The news provided by the NAEP is "legitimately" good news for New Jersey, says DePierro.
"Criticism has a political agenda," says DePierro, who adds that "making broad, sweeping generalizations about a state system is inappropriate."
"New Jersey has some very high-performing districts, as well as low-performing districts," says the Seton Hall educator. The state, like the nation, is not just one "wretched system.’’
Other good news — or bad news — includes a report from the New America Foundation, contending New Jersey leads the way in providing early childhood education. The National Institute for Early Education Research, at Rutgers University’s Graduate School of Education, also says New Jersey ranks among the top 10 states for providing early childhood schooling.
Guenther doesn’t criticize the state’s preschools. He says they can’t be expanded "in these historically bad economic times."
He also was asked to respond to what was, for Schundler, really bad news because it was such good news to the critics of one of his most cherished reforms, school choice — including vouchers.
The commissioner, a former Jersey City mayor, is a champion of vouchers, traveling to Milwaukee years ago as a supporter of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, or MPCP, a program of providing students at private schools — including religious schools — with vouchers. An independent evaluation concluded voucher students do no better than those left behind in inner-city public schools, the Milwaukee Public Schools, or MPS.
"We have established that … students in our MPCP and MPS panels are demonstrating achievement gains in reading and math that are generally equivalent," reported the School Choice Demonstration Project at the University of Arkansas.
Guenther changed the subject.
"Other studies have shown, overwhelmingly, that many charter schools are doing a superb job,’’ he wrote. Charter schools are not voucher schools.
Of course, for many, simply the idea of choice is a good thing, even if it doesn’t produce measurable academic progress. For those, even bad news is good news.
