Another Reason to Like Chris Christie

[HI54UNI]

Chris Christie: How Corzine tried to sabotage my governorship, and how I stopped him

Speaking in Indiana this week, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, R, told a story about his inauguration day, and how his predecessor attempted to force him to raise taxes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini ... 24843.html

[native]

Hail to the Chief!

[Pwns]

I second that, Native.

Christie is one of my top 3 favorite American politicians, easily. I like him a lot better than the blue-blooded feaux-republicans of the northeast like Doomberg and Ghouliani.

[GannonFan]

I'm not sold on Christie, especially for higher office, but there is something refreshing about his style - he's very straightforward and very matter of fact.

[native]

I'm not sold on Christie, especially for higher office, but there is something refreshing about his style - he's very straightforward and very matter of fact.

I would like to see hime serve two terms as governor, a couple in the Senate, and then go for the top.

But damn, we may not have that luxury. You always go to war with what you've got.

[danefan]

I like some of the principles that Christie is apparently trying to instill in the NJ government, but I'm not 100% sold on his methods of applying them.

For example, take the 2nd train tunnel between NJ and NYC. Currently hunderds of thousands of people commute daily into NYC on one single railraod track, a track which is owned by Amtrak and on which Amtrak trains also run and get priority. This has significatnly hampered the commute for most NJ residents and also has stymied the real estate market in a lot of NJ towns.

Construction on a multi-billion 2nd tunnel to be owned and operated exclusively by the Port Authority of NY/NJ was already underway as the funding was secured by the last Stimulus bill.

Christie pulled the plug citing the uncertainty of the final cost and who the responsible party would be (e.g. Feds, NJ, etc..)?

I understand the rationale that NJ shouldn't be writing a blank check, but initially this looks like a very short-sighted decision. He has offered no realistic alternative to ease the commute. Construction prices are never going to be lower then they are right now and while a risk, the hope is that the state of NJ will be in a much better position in 2017 or 18 when any additional costs arise then it is right now, not to mention the ability for private investment later on if necessary.

Only time will tell whether he made the "right" decision, but as of right now it looks awfully shortsighted to me.

[HI54UNI]

I like some of the principles that Christie is apparently trying to instill in the NJ government, but I'm not 100% sold on his methods of applying them.

For example, take the 2nd train tunnel between NJ and NYC. Currently hunderds of thousands of people commute daily into NYC on one single railraod track, a track which is owned by Amtrak and on which Amtrak trains also run and get priority. This has significatnly hampered the commute for most NJ residents and also has stymied the real estate market in a lot of NJ towns.

Construction on a multi-billion 2nd tunnel to be owned and operated exclusively by the Port Authority of NY/NJ was already underway as the funding was secured by the last Stimulus bill.

Christie pulled the plug citing the uncertainty of the final cost and who the responsible party would be (e.g. Feds, NJ, etc..)?

I understand the rationale that NJ shouldn't be writing a blank check, but initially this looks like a very short-sighted decision. He has offered no realistic alternative to ease the commute. Construction prices are never going to be lower then they are right now and while a risk, the hope is that the state of NJ will be in a much better position in 2017 or 18 when any additional costs arise then it is right now, not to mention the ability for private investment later on if necessary.

Only time will tell whether he made the "right" decision, but as of right now it looks awfully shortsighted to me.

Is the Port Authority on the hook or the state of NJ? Where does the Port Authority get its money to pay for this? Do they have the ability to tax? Is it paid for by the transit riders?

[Col Hogan]

Chris Christie: How Corzine tried to sabotage my governorship, and how I stopped him

Speaking in Indiana this week, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, R, told a story about his inauguration day, and how his predecessor attempted to force him to raise taxes.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opini ... 24843.html

Either governor in that room that night would make a good President...Christie or Mitch Daniels of Indiana (whom I would like to see run...)

[GannonFan]

I like some of the principles that Christie is apparently trying to instill in the NJ government, but I'm not 100% sold on his methods of applying them.

For example, take the 2nd train tunnel between NJ and NYC. Currently hunderds of thousands of people commute daily into NYC on one single railraod track, a track which is owned by Amtrak and on which Amtrak trains also run and get priority. This has significatnly hampered the commute for most NJ residents and also has stymied the real estate market in a lot of NJ towns.

Construction on a multi-billion 2nd tunnel to be owned and operated exclusively by the Port Authority of NY/NJ was already underway as the funding was secured by the last Stimulus bill.

Christie pulled the plug citing the uncertainty of the final cost and who the responsible party would be (e.g. Feds, NJ, etc..)?

I understand the rationale that NJ shouldn't be writing a blank check, but initially this looks like a very short-sighted decision. He has offered no realistic alternative to ease the commute. Construction prices are never going to be lower then they are right now and while a risk, the hope is that the state of NJ will be in a much better position in 2017 or 18 when any additional costs arise then it is right now, not to mention the ability for private investment later on if necessary.

Only time will tell whether he made the "right" decision, but as of right now it looks awfully shortsighted to me.

Is the Port Authority on the hook or the state of NJ? Where does the Port Authority get its money to pay for this? Do they have the ability to tax? Is it paid for by the transit riders?

I thought part or most of Christie's reason for pulling support for this is because New Jersey was going to be on the hook for 100% of te cost overruns. For projects of this scope, that could be huge. Maybe it will come back but with Jersey not in a position to take a beating when it does overrun.

[AZGrizFan]

I'm not sold on Christie, especially for higher office, but there is something refreshing about his style - he's very straightforward and very matter of fact.

I would like to see hime serve two terms as governor, a couple in the Senate, and then go for the top.

But damn, we may not have that luxury. You always go to war with what you've got.

Nah. The goin' timeframe now is 2 years as a community organizer and then about 6 months in the Senate. 1 Governor term surely trumps THAT.

[danefan]

Is the Port Authority on the hook or the state of NJ? Where does the Port Authority get its money to pay for this? Do they have the ability to tax? Is it paid for by the transit riders?

I thought part or most of Christie's reason for pulling support for this is because New Jersey was going to be on the hook for 100% of te cost overruns. For projects of this scope, that could be huge. Maybe it will come back but with Jersey not in a position to take a beating when it does overrun.

That was the initial justification for the pull. Then the Feds and Port Authority provided him with alternatives if there is a huge cost overrun, including low-interest (almost zero) guaranteed financing from the Feds and private investments opportunities. Reportedly he refused to really even listen to these alteratives.

The speculation is that Christie just wants the $3+ billion in transportation money NJ got from the Feds to fulfill a campaign promise regarding the other projects. The funding wasn't restricted to the Tunnel but it was allocated to it initially.

This would be the largest transportation project (in $$ figures) to ever occur in the US so a hesitation is justified. There were countless years of research on this though which all support the need for it and the costs associated with it. He apparently just threw all that out the window.

All of my knowledge on this comes from the media though and we all know how accurate it is. So I guess you never really know.

[danefan]

I like some of the principles that Christie is apparently trying to instill in the NJ government, but I'm not 100% sold on his methods of applying them.

For example, take the 2nd train tunnel between NJ and NYC. Currently hunderds of thousands of people commute daily into NYC on one single railraod track, a track which is owned by Amtrak and on which Amtrak trains also run and get priority. This has significatnly hampered the commute for most NJ residents and also has stymied the real estate market in a lot of NJ towns.

Construction on a multi-billion 2nd tunnel to be owned and operated exclusively by the Port Authority of NY/NJ was already underway as the funding was secured by the last Stimulus bill.

Christie pulled the plug citing the uncertainty of the final cost and who the responsible party would be (e.g. Feds, NJ, etc..)?

I understand the rationale that NJ shouldn't be writing a blank check, but initially this looks like a very short-sighted decision. He has offered no realistic alternative to ease the commute. Construction prices are never going to be lower then they are right now and while a risk, the hope is that the state of NJ will be in a much better position in 2017 or 18 when any additional costs arise then it is right now, not to mention the ability for private investment later on if necessary.

Only time will tell whether he made the "right" decision, but as of right now it looks awfully shortsighted to me.

Is the Port Authority on the hook or the state of NJ? Where does the Port Authority get its money to pay for this? Do they have the ability to tax? Is it paid for by the transit riders?

The State of NJ would be on the hook for their portion of the tunnel. The Port Authority would build the tunnel and operate it but receives no taxpayer funding to do so. The Port Authority derives all revenue from the transit riders.

My understanding is the NJ would be responsible for most costs associated with the tunnel itself, and the Port Authority would have been responsible (using all commuter funding) for all costs relating to the building of the new station on the other end in Manhattan- Moynihan Station. The Feds also would have been responsible for a portion of it.

Here's a whole website dedicated to the project. http://www.arctunnel.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[GannonFan]

I thought part or most of Christie's reason for pulling support for this is because New Jersey was going to be on the hook for 100% of te cost overruns. For projects of this scope, that could be huge. Maybe it will come back but with Jersey not in a position to take a beating when it does overrun.

That was the initial justification for the pull. Then the Feds and Port Authority provided him with alternatives if there is a huge cost overrun, including low-interest (almost zero) guaranteed financing from the Feds and private investments opportunities. Reportedly he refused to really even listen to these alteratives.

The speculation is that Christie just wants the $3+ billion in transportation money NJ got from the Feds to fulfill a campaign promise regarding the other projects. The funding wasn't restricted to the Tunnel but it was allocated to it initially.

This would be the largest transportation project (in $$ figures) to ever occur in the US so a hesitation is justified. There were countless years of research on this though which all support the need for it and the costs associated with it. He apparently just threw all that out the window.

All of my knowledge on this comes from the media though and we all know how accurate it is. So I guess you never really know.

Getting to have low interest loans doesn't necessarily eliminate the risk of what could be incredible overruns. Look at the Big Dig in Boston - that thing went well over budget, and this would be an even bigger project. I agree that he may very well just be using the money to do other things (not that that's a bad thing, per se) but there was and still is plenty of reason to be skeptical of the long range costs for this project.

[danefan]

That was the initial justification for the pull. Then the Feds and Port Authority provided him with alternatives if there is a huge cost overrun, including low-interest (almost zero) guaranteed financing from the Feds and private investments opportunities. Reportedly he refused to really even listen to these alteratives.

The speculation is that Christie just wants the $3+ billion in transportation money NJ got from the Feds to fulfill a campaign promise regarding the other projects. The funding wasn't restricted to the Tunnel but it was allocated to it initially.

This would be the largest transportation project (in $$ figures) to ever occur in the US so a hesitation is justified. There were countless years of research on this though which all support the need for it and the costs associated with it. He apparently just threw all that out the window.

All of my knowledge on this comes from the media though and we all know how accurate it is. So I guess you never really know.

Getting to have low interest loans doesn't necessarily eliminate the risk of what could be incredible overruns. Look at the Big Dig in Boston - that thing went well over budget, and this would be an even bigger project. I agree that he may very well just be using the money to do other things (not that that's a bad thing, per se) but there was and still is plenty of reason to be skeptical of the long range costs for this project.

There is absolutely reason to be skeptical about the long range costs, but there is also reason to weight those potential costs against the potential return for NJ residents. That's my point. I'm not sufficiently satisfied that he did adequately weighed those competing factors.

This project began in process in 1995 and included a very detailed analysis, all of which indicated it was an absolute necessity for the long-term growth of NJ. Christie killed it in 30 days after construction had already begun.

[GannonFan]

Getting to have low interest loans doesn't necessarily eliminate the risk of what could be incredible overruns. Look at the Big Dig in Boston - that thing went well over budget, and this would be an even bigger project. I agree that he may very well just be using the money to do other things (not that that's a bad thing, per se) but there was and still is plenty of reason to be skeptical of the long range costs for this project.

There is absolutely reason to be skeptical about the long range costs, but there is also reason to weight those potential costs against the potential return for NJ residents. That's my point. I'm not sufficiently satisfied that he did adequately weighed those competing factors.

This project began in process in 1995 and included a very detailed analysis, all of which indicated it was an absolute necessity for the long-term growth of NJ. Christie killed it in 30 days after construction had already begun.

Maybe he's hoping somebody else will take on the responsibility of shouldering all the project cost overruns? I'm sure they'd do the project in a heartbeat if they didn't have that completely unknown, and potentially unlimited, cost hanging over their head.

[danefan]

There is absolutely reason to be skeptical about the long range costs, but there is also reason to weight those potential costs against the potential return for NJ residents. That's my point. I'm not sufficiently satisfied that he did adequately weighed those competing factors.

This project began in process in 1995 and included a very detailed analysis, all of which indicated it was an absolute necessity for the long-term growth of NJ. Christie killed it in 30 days after construction had already begun.

Maybe he's hoping somebody else will take on the responsibility of shouldering all the project cost overruns? I'm sure they'd do the project in a heartbeat if they didn't have that completely unknown, and potentially unlimited, cost hanging over their head.

Hopefully you're right becuase its desparately needed. The NJ Transit commuter transit system is operating well beyond its capacity now and its driving people out of NJ and real property prices down. Good for some I guess, but you don't really live in NJ for low property prices. For the most part you live in NJ (at least central and Northern NJ) because it provides you access to NYC.

I'm hoping the legislature will somehow get the project up on a bond or referendum at some point. There's way too much invested in it now to just quit.

[UNI88]

N.J.'s past may be Illinois' future: What to expect if you're expecting Gov. Bill Brady

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_co ... brady.html

First, Christie did cut the budget — to $31.9 billion authorized for the current year from $33.3 billion in state spending authorized by former Gov. Jon Corzine for fiscal 2010, according to figures provided by the nonpartisan New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, a state agency.

That's a 4.2 percent trim, well short of the 10 percent Brady is promising in Illinois, but real money nevertheless.

How did Christie do it? Nips and tucks here and there, but mostly by cutting education funding, reducing state aid to local units of government and suspending a property-tax rebate program for seniors and lower- and middle-income taxpayers.
...
Christie also campaigned against the "unconscionable" practice of state borrowing to make required annual payments into pension funds. His solution after he was sworn in earlier this year? He skipped the $3.1 billion pension payment altogether.
...
He also signed a cap of 2 percent per year on hikes in property taxes — taxes that a Gannett newspapers study found grew this year by an average 23 percent if you factor in the missing rebate. Such a cap sounds great, but critics say it's simply part of a shell game Christie is playing to force municipalities to own the painful cuts ahead.

"We send about two-thirds of our budget right back to schools and local governments," said New Jersey Democratic Party Chairman John Wisniewski. "Reduce that, and the locals either have to cut services or raise taxes," which will be very difficult under the cap.

NJ posters, how much is truth?

[danefan]

N.J.'s past may be Illinois' future: What to expect if you're expecting Gov. Bill Brady

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_co ... brady.html

First, Christie did cut the budget — to $31.9 billion authorized for the current year from $33.3 billion in state spending authorized by former Gov. Jon Corzine for fiscal 2010, according to figures provided by the nonpartisan New Jersey Office of Legislative Services, a state agency.

That's a 4.2 percent trim, well short of the 10 percent Brady is promising in Illinois, but real money nevertheless.

How did Christie do it? Nips and tucks here and there, but mostly by cutting education funding, reducing state aid to local units of government and suspending a property-tax rebate program for seniors and lower- and middle-income taxpayers.
...
Christie also campaigned against the "unconscionable" practice of state borrowing to make required annual payments into pension funds. His solution after he was sworn in earlier this year? He skipped the $3.1 billion pension payment altogether.
...
He also signed a cap of 2 percent per year on hikes in property taxes — taxes that a Gannett newspapers study found grew this year by an average 23 percent if you factor in the missing rebate. Such a cap sounds great, but critics say it's simply part of a shell game Christie is playing to force municipalities to own the painful cuts ahead.

"We send about two-thirds of our budget right back to schools and local governments," said New Jersey Democratic Party Chairman John Wisniewski. "Reduce that, and the locals either have to cut services or raise taxes," which will be very difficult under the cap.

NJ posters, how much is truth?

100% true. My real property taxes went up mainly because Christie decreased funding to local government and schools, leaving the taxpayers to make up the difference as the local politicians and school boards didn't cut really anything.

That's not necesarilly Christie's fault though.

[danefan]

An update on Christie's tunnel decision and some quantifications of the impact and the cost.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/1 ... nment.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More detail coming in just about every day on this and varying opinions from so-called "experts" on both sides.

[AZGrizFan]

N.J.'s past may be Illinois' future: What to expect if you're expecting Gov. Bill Brady

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_co ... brady.html



NJ posters, how much is truth?

100% true. My real property taxes went up mainly because Christie decreased funding to local government and schools, leaving the taxpayers to make up the difference as the local politicians and school boards didn't cut really anything.That's not necesarilly Christie's fault though.

Exactly. His job is to take care of the state.

[danefan]

100% true. My real property taxes went up mainly because Christie decreased funding to local government and schools, leaving the taxpayers to make up the difference as the local politicians and school boards didn't cut really anything.That's not necesarilly Christie's fault though.

Exactly. His job is to take care of the state.

Well, arguably what he did was say "Not my problem to deal with education funding" and passed the buck (pun intended) and the related blame to the local school boards. There is a pretty strong argument that the health of the schools in NU are very much the problem of the Governor.

[AZGrizFan]

Exactly. His job is to take care of the state.

Well, arguably what he did was say "Not my problem to deal with education funding" and passed the buck (pun intended) and the related blame to the local school boards. There is a pretty strong argument that the health of the schools in NU are very much the problem of the Governor.

Revenues are down. Period. The fact that the school boards and local politicians chose not to cut ANYTHING speaks VOLUMES about their ability to understand simple economics. Just like Christie's interaction with the union teacher who didn't think SHE should have to feel ANY of the pain of the state/country, it appears the local gov'ts and school boards feel much like she does.

Fuck 'em. Fuck 'em all.