| ||||||||||||
Newjerseynewsroom.com - Is Gov. Christie's charter school proposal losing steam?
Njpressmedia.com – The Courier Post - Christie and Sweeney's benefits deal includes sunset clause
Associated Press -Unions turn on New Jersey Senate president over health benefits
Statehouse Bureau-The Record, Star Ledger -As state Democrats prepare to introduce plan to overhaul public employee benefits, Christie's stance remains unclear
Statehouse Bureau - N.J. has most educated lawmakers in the nation, study finds
Newjerseynewsroom.com - Is Gov. Christie's charter school proposal losing steam?
Njpressmedia.com – The Courier Post - Christie and Sweeney's benefits deal includes sunset clause
Associated Press -Unions turn on New Jersey Senate president over health benefits
Statehouse Bureau-The Record, Star Ledger -As state Democrats prepare to introduce plan to overhaul public employee benefits, Christie's stance remains unclear
Statehouse Bureau - N.J. has most educated lawmakers in the nation, study finds
Newjerseynewsroom.com - Is Gov. Christie's charter school proposal losing steam?
Monday, 13 June 2011 14:16
BY BOB HOLT
NEWJERSEYNEWSROOM.COM
A large part of Governor Chris Christie’s long running battle for education reform is the expansion of charter schools. But as time has passed, the idea has slowly been losing steam.
James Crisfield, the superintendent of Millburn schools has called charters “boutique" schools that siphon money and students from public districts. And one of Christie’s chief allies in support of charters, State Sen. Ray Lesniak (D-Union) told NJ.com now says he would prefer a scaled-down set of ideas for charters to be used mainly at "chronically failing" urban schools.
In Washington a year ago, Christie said the voucher bill co-sponsored by Kean and Lesniak, the Educational Opportunity Scholarship Act, "will lead to school vouchers across New Jersey so choice is available to every parent."
Sen. Dick Codey (D-Essex) said that many people support their public schools and they are reacting with anger about the idea of privatization.
According to the Education Law Center data consistently shows most charter schools do not outperform the districts, and a number of charters consistently rank as underperforming schools.
They recommend encouraging innovation in charter schools, requiring a five-year evaluation plan, collaborating in districts with higher needs, listening to local input, and closing underperforming charter schools. The ELC also says that charters often enroll far fewer students with disabilities, those learning the English language, and students from low income families.
Back in April, New Jersey Newsroom reported that a Rutgers-Eagleton poll showed that New Jersey voters are split on charter schools in the state. Forty-four percent of voters polled favored increasing the number of charter schools, while 42 percent were against more additions.
According to philly.com a controversial bill was approved by the New Jersey Assembly Education Committee in May which would require voter approval of charter proposals. Charter supporters oppose this proposal, which could limit the amount of charter schools.
Njpressmedia.com – The Courier Post - Christie and Sweeney's benefits deal includes sunset clause
8:28 AM, Jun. 14, 2011 |
Written by
JASON METHOD
TRENTON — A proposed new requirement that government workers pay an increased portion of their health insurance would end in four years under a new compromise announced Monday.
The "sunset" provision in the legislation will open the door for state and local unions to negotiate again on health benefits. A spokesman for state Senate President Stephen M. Sweeney confirmed the inclusion of the provision.
The new pension and benefit reforms, negotiated between Republican Gov. Chris Christie and Sweeney, a Democrat, would also not contain many elements reformers had sought.
According to a fact sheet distributed by state Senate Democrats, the new compromise bill would:
Keep a controversial 9 percent pension boost given in 2001. Christie had sought to eliminate the pension bump, which he once said was "given for no good reason."
Maintain the retirement age for current employees; it would only rise for new workers.
Not lengthen the number of final years on which employees' pensions are based. Currently, most pensions are based on the highest three years worth of salary.
The details emerged Monday as legislators wrangled over the bill.
Unions, nonetheless, continued to oppose the reforms, and union members and leaders met with lawmakers to press their case as to why they should not pass the legislation, which would cost government workers thousands of dollars four years from now, when employee health care contributions fully kick in.
Hetty Rosenstein, state director of the Communications Workers of America, said the benefits reform legislation being pushed by Sweeney is worse for public employees than advertised because it assumes health care costs won't rise in coming years.
It's "bad numbers that expose his bad policy," Rosenstein said of the proposal, which bases employee cost-sharing for health insurance on income and plan cost, but doesn't take rising health care costs into account.
But Sweeney said the latest pushback from the union proves his point that public workers have been unwilling to share soaring health insurance costs with taxpayers.
Associated Press -Unions turn on New Jersey Senate president over health benefits
By ANGELA DELLI SANTI Associated Press | Posted: Monday, June 13, 2011 9:44 pm
TRENTON - A war of words has erupted over a proposal to require public workers to pay more for health benefits, with the largest public worker union denouncing the plan as dishonest and the Legislature's top Democrat dismissing the unions' position as selfish.
Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Salem, Gloucester, Cumberland, who is driving the proposal to raise health and pension benefits contributions for state, county and local workers through legislation, agreed Monday to support a provision allowing the changes to expire after four years.
But that seemed to do little to win over reluctant Democrats in the Legislature or change the unions' staunch opposition to what they see as an infringement on collective bargaining.
The bill is scheduled for its first public hearing Thursday in the Senate. Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver said Monday she's still hoping to broker a compromise that relieves taxpayers as it protects worker rights. As of now, the bill would get through the Legislature without support from a majority of Democrats in either house.
Hetty Rosenstein, state director of the Communications Workers of America, said the legislation Sweeney is pushing is worse for public employees than advertised because it assumes health care costs will not rise in coming years.
It's "bad numbers that expose his bad policy," Rosenstein said of the proposal, which bases employee cost-sharing for health insurance on income and plan cost. But Sweeney said the latest pushback from the union proves his point: that public workers have been unwilling to share soaring health insurance costs with taxpayers.
"I was very happy CWA pointed out that health care costs will go up 28 percent over the next four years, and they want the taxpayers to pay every bit of it," Sweeney said.
He said employees will get more health insurance options and some will cost less. The legislation allows for new health plans, and that will help control costs, he said.
The proposal calls for workers to pay 3 to 35 percent of their health care premiums, based on income, after a four-year phase-in. Public workers now contribute 1.5 percent of their salaries toward health care.
A survey of public and private employers by the nonprofit Kaiser Family Foundation last year found that workers with employer-sponsored health plans on average paid 19 percent of the premium for single coverage and 30 percent for family coverage. Those in retail paid the highest average percentage of the premiums, the survey found, while state and local government workers paid the lowest - on average 9 percent of the premium for single coverage and 25 percent for family.
Under the proposed legislation, which is still being drafted and is subject to change, a worker earning $70,000 a year would pay 22 percent of the total after the phase-in. Rosenstein said that same worker would pay $1,100 a year more than the table shows - or $5,277 total - if health care costs rise 6 percent a year.
Sweeney said workers could reduce out-of-pocket health care costs by choosing a cheaper family plan.
Statehouse Bureau-The Record, Star Ledger -As state Democrats prepare to introduce plan to overhaul public employee benefits, Christie's stance remains unclear
Published: Tuesday, June 14, 2011, 6:00 AM
TRENTON — The state’s top lawmakers said Monday they cleared a significant hurdle in efforts to overhaul public employee benefits after agreeing to a plan that shifts more medical costs onto workers while protecting future collective bargaining rights.
The spotlight now turns to Gov. Chris Christie, who has been uncharacteristically quiet as Assembly Speaker Shelia Oliver and Senate President Stephen Sweeney hammer out the final details of a controversial bill overhauling pension and health benefits that is scheduled for its first legislative hearing on Thursday.
Sweeney (D-Gloucester) endorsed a plan Monday being promoted by Oliver (D-Essex) that would increase health benefit contributions for all of the state’s 500,000 public workers but allow unions to seek lower rates at the negotiating table starting in 2014.
"The sunset provision is certainly fair and is another example of the kinds of compromise we have been able to achieve with this legislation," Sweeney said in a written statement.
A spokesman for Christie, Michael Drewniak, said the governor had no comment on the sunset provision or the broader proposal.
Christie has spent the last 18 months as governor making his case for overhauling what he has contended are overly lavish pension and health benefits for the state’s public employees, often resorting to blunt criticism of them, their union leaders and Democratic lawmakers.
Sweeney and Christie recently agreed on a plan that shifts more of the costs of pensions and health benefits to public workers in the form of increased contributions, along with pushing back the retirement age and freezing cost-of-living adjustments for retirees.
The state’s unfunded pension and health liability combined is more than $110 billion, among the worst in the nation.
Leaders of the state’s public unions have mounted a fierce opposition to the proposal, urging members to reach out to legislators, lobbying in the halls of the Statehouse and issuing blistering news releases questioning lawmakers’ commitment to collective bargaining.
Sweeney has decided to bring the bill to the Senate floor despite lack of support from Democrats, and will rely on Republicans to approve the measure.
Facing similar opposition, Oliver has said she will not move the bill without "significant" support from Assembly Democrats, and it’s unclear whether the sunset provision has resulted in enough support to overcome that self-imposed threshold.
"The speaker continues to work to bring all sides together on a plan that protects taxpayers and worker rights and has no further comment," said Tom Hester Jr., a spokesman for the Assembly Democrats.
The sunset provision may attract lawmakers who were on the fence, but it will probably do little to persuade staunch supporters of collective bargaining, like Assemblywoman Bonnie Watson Coleman, whose district includes many state employees.
"Any legislative attempt to erode the rights of public workers is a mistake," said Watson Coleman (D-Mercer).
Under the Sweeney bill, all state and local public employees would pay a percentage of their health care premiums in a tiered system based on their salary. All employees who earn more than $110,000 would pay 35 percent of their premiums, while those at the other end of the pay scale would pay 3 percent, records show.
Still, the head of the state’s largest public employee union said the true cost to public workers is higher than advertised because it doesn’t take into account rising premiums. Public employees could pay more than $1,000 higher than expected if premiums rise by 6 percent each year, Hetty Rosenstein, president of the Communications Workers of America, said Monday.
"Sweeney assumes that health care costs will not go up a single dollar over four years, a deeply unrealistic claim that is all the more ironic given that his plan does nothing at all to implement cost containment strategies we know can save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars," Rosenstein said.
But Derek Roseman, a spokesman for the Senate Democrats, said the Sweeney proposal allows workers to choose from an array of plans, including less expensive ones that will allow workers to control their costs.
Statehouse Bureau - N.J. has most educated lawmakers in the nation, study finds
Published: Tuesday, June 14, 2011, 8:15 AM Updated: Tuesday, June 14, 2011, 8:37 AM
TRENTON — It is the state that brought you The Sopranos and The Situation, Einstein, insufferable property taxes and Snookie.
And now, to this calvacade of distinction, add one more.
We have the smartest Legislature.
The Legislature that has endured more than its share of indictments, jokes and scandal has also carved a niche as the one with the highest percentage of lawmakers with graduate degrees in the nation, according to a study of all 50 state Legislatures published by Chronicle of Higher Education.
Go figure.
Almost 60 percent of members of the state Senate and Assembly in New Jersey have an advanced degree, whether it’s a master’s, law degree or doctorate, the study says.
That’s a higher proportion than any other state, and far higher than the general population, where only 13 percent of the state’s residents have more than a bachelor’s degree.
Then again, New Jersey’s most powerful legislator — Senate President Stephen Sweeney — never went to college.
"I think it’s important that there’s a mix," said Sweeney, an ironworker by trade and union organizer for the International Association of Ironworkers.
Sweeney, whose patois is long on Pennsauken and short on Princeton, did his graduate work, if you will, as director of the Gloucester County freeholder board.
"I don’t think we should put such an emphasis on a diploma as much as how this person thinks, how they tick and how they work," Sweeney added.
That said, he thinks it’s "great" that there are many well-educated members.
Then there is the second most powerful lawmaker, Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver (D-Essex), and she bridges the education gap in the Legislature’s upper echelon; she holds a master’s degree in planning and administration from Columbia University.
Of New Jersey’s most educated members:
• 25.8 percent have a master’s degree.
• 27.5 percent have law degrees.
• 5.8 percent have doctorates.
New Jersey is not near the top of the class when it comes to the total number of lawmakers with a college education, however. Eighty percent of New Jersey legislators have a bachelor’s degree, making it 17th in the nation, just below Ohio and ahead of Utah.
So the question naturally arises: Why does this state of dese, dem, dose and diners have such a highfalutin Legislature?
Alan Rosenthal, a professor of public policy at Rutgers University and who studies state legislatures, said New Jersey might have more professionals in the Legislature because of the way the system is set up.
Most states have marathon sessions that last from one to three months, he said, while in New Jersey lawmakers are at work year-round, but at most only a couple of days a week at a time.
"As an insurance agent or real estate agent, you can’t tell people to come back in 30, 60 or 90 days and I can help you," said Rosenthal. "But you can tell people I’ll see you Friday instead of Thursday."
Still, Rosenthal said he doesn’t see why the Legislature’s education level should be more or less reflective of the population.
"The members don’t have to reflect the populace in terms of their educational, social characteristics," he said. "All they have to do is be responsive to what people in their districts want."
Lawmakers from various walks of life said they did not think it was problematic that the Legislature was more educated than the general population.
But some took a sardonic view.
"So what you’re saying is the entire New Jersey Legislature is overqualified. Maybe that explains their performance over the last 10 or 15 years," joked Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll (R-Morris).
Carroll is among those "overqualified" lawmakers, since he has a law degree from Rutgers. "I plead the Fifth," he said.
