Dump Mike Ferguson (NJ7)

Tom DeLay was recently indicted for what amounts to money laundering under Texas campaign finance laws. He was also rebuked three times by the House Ethics panel last fall, and two other times in the 1990s.

Representative Mike Ferguson (R-NJ7) is the largest recipient of campaign cash from Tom DeLay at a whopping $54,403, according to FEC reports. Here is each individual contribution, the committee it came from and where Rep. Ferguson put the money.

To A Mike Ferguson Campaign Committee

• 03/30/1998 $1,000 from ARMPAC
• 10/26/1998 $2,000 from ARMPAC
• 10/26/1998 $403 from ARMPAC
• 10/06/1998 $1,000 from Tom Delay Congressional Committee
• 10/12/2000 $1,000 from Tom Delay Congressional Committee
• 06/12/2000 $5,000 from ARMPAC
• 06/12/2000 $5,000 from ARMPAC
• 05/09/2001 $4,500 from ARMPAC
• 05/09/2001 $4,500 from ARMPAC
• 05/09/2001 $4,500 from ARMPAC
• 05/09/2001 $500 from ARMPAC
• 04/26/2002 $5,000 from ARMPAC
• 03/28/2003 $5,000 from ARMPAC
• 06/17/2003 $5,000 from ARMPAC
• 06/27/2005 $5,000 from ARMPAC

TOTAL: $49,403

To MIKEPAC, The Leadership PAC for Mike Ferguson

• 10/26/2004 $5,000 from ARMPAC

Total: $5,000

This demonstrates consistent support from Tom DeLay since Rep. Ferguson's first run for office in the 6th Congressional District against Frank Pallone, and through his move to the 7th District and his win against Maryanne Connelly using illegal contributions.

Posted by admin at 06:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

This letter from John Cantilli was published in the Cranford Chronicle on September 29, 2005.

Dear Editor,

After the gulf coast states were damaged by Hurricane Katrina, President Bush suspended the Davis-Bacon Act (1931), which requires that federally-funded reconstruction contract recipients pay laborers the prevailing local wage. For example, one hourly wage in Louisiana, for a "common laborer", is $9.55. With the suspension of Davis-Bacon, these workers will make $5.15 per hour.

What does our US Representative Mike Ferguson think about this? He thinks it is fine, as long as it is temporary. Ferguson signed on to the September 15 "LoBiondo letter", which suggests that the Davis-Bacon suspension should end by November 8, 2005. A House bill to overturn the suspension immediately, H.R. 3763, has about 180 co-sponsors. They are all Democrats. Ferguson, a Republican, does not object to a huge pay cut for laborers. He does not mind paying $5.15 per hour for at least two months, and he probably signed the lukewarm, toothless LoBiondo letter just to provide some political cover for himself. If Ferguson really cared about the gulf states reconstruction workers, he would support H.R. 3763.

This is hardly an isolated incident. Ferguson has repeatedly shown that his priorities are needless tax cuts for millionaires, financial favors for huge pharmaceutical corporations, and strict loyalty to the extremist Republican leadership of the House. His big campaign donors are his real constituents. Tom DeLay's eager young protégé has learned his lessons well.

John Cantilli

You can send letters to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

Posted by admin at 06:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I'll admit that this headline is misleading, though it is absolutely correct. In a vote on September 22, Congressman Mike Ferguson voted to allow federal Head Start money to be used by religious organizations that discriminate on the basis of religion. Here's the text the House passed and Rep. Ferguson voted for:

654 NONDISCRIMINATION PROVISIONS.

(a)(1) The Secretary shall not provide financial assistance for any program, project, or activity under this subchapter unless the grant or contract with respect thereto specifically provides that no person with responsibilities in the operation thereof will discriminate with respect to any such program, project, or activity because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, political affiliation, or beliefs.

(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a recipient of financial assistance under this subchapter that is a religious corporation, association, educational institution, or society, with respect to the employment of individuals of a particular religion to perform work connected with the carrying on by such corporation, association, educational institution, or society of its activities. Such recipients shall comply with the other requirements contained in this subsection.

This couldn't be much clearer: schools based in religious organizations or churches that receive Head Start funds would be allowed to deny employment to people of other religions or even sects of their religion. In fact, they could fire existing teachers who are not of their religion, no matter how good or loved these teachers are by the students.

Since the vast majority of the House is Christian of some sort, it's pretty clear this is intended to allow Christian churches to hire only Christian teachers if they want, and fire non-Christians.

What this misses is that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the United States, and that mosques that run Head Start programs would be allowed to fire any Christians working in the program, and to deny employment to them. They'd also be allowed to fire Jews, Deists, Mormons, etc. Anyone they want.

It misses that Judaism is the second largest religion in the United States, and temples or other Jewish religious organizations that run Head Start programs could fire or not hire Christians, Deists, Mormons, Muslims, etc.

Same is true for Buddhists, Hindus, Scientologists, Wicca, Animists, Pagans, etc. All religions would be allowed to discriminate against each other and use federal tax dollars to do it.

Not only is this un-American in nature, but it is also imprudent. Head Start programs don't pay their teachers much to start with, and certainly not a living wage. That means the people who take these jobs are often dedicated and committed to helping poor children get a leg up out of poverty.

But there are not a lot of people like this, and there are not lines around the corner looking for one of these jobs when they open up. By adding a religious test to the hiring process, you severely shrink the pool of qualified applicants and reduce the quality of Head Start programs that are often the difference between a successful life and a failed life.

The Senate has not voted on extending the Head Start program yet, and is likely to leave out this provision allowing employment discrimination. This will result in a committee of House and Senate members determining the final version of the bill. It is still possible that the provision would be stripped out of Head Start with the proper pressure.

Contact Congressman Ferguson to tell him that you don't want your tax dollars paying for discriminatory hiring practices, and to support a resolution calling on the reconciliation committee to strip the offending language from the bill.

You can write or call his office at 908-757-7835.

You can do the same in newspapers by writing to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at

Posted by admin at 07:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Tom DeLay, who gives more money to Mike Ferguson than any other Congressman, was indicted for conspiracy today.

A Texas grand jury on Wednesday charged Rep. Tom DeLay and two political associates with conspiracy in a campaign finance scheme, an indictment that could force him to step down as House majority leader.

DeLay attorney Steve Brittain said DeLay was accused of a criminal conspiracy along with two associates, John Colyandro, former executive director of a Texas political action committee formed by DeLay, and Jim Ellis, who heads DeLay's national political committee.

Tom DeLay and his friends have delivered more than $200,000 over the past five years to Mike Ferguson, and Rep. Ferguson has sent a good bit of that money back. It is time for Mike Ferguson to send all the money back.

Write or call his office at 908-757-7835 and ask him to give Tom DeLay's money back.

You can do the same in newspapers by writing to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

Posted by admin at 05:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The Star Ledger's John Farmer calls the position that cutting taxes is always a good thing "lunatic."

There's something lunatic about the opposition among some conservatives -- not all, by any means -- to any tax increase to help finance the guns- and-butter policies of the federal government under the Bush administration. [snip]

Here we are fighting a two-front war, facing massive new costs for home security and rebuilding along the Gulf Coast while laboring under runaway federal spending and the biggest total debt burdens in our history -- but no tax increase, please. Indeed, what we need, according to this view, is even more tax cuts. What could they be smoking?

The purveyors of this view -- usually found in such redoubts of the Republican right as Forbes magazine, the editorial cubbyholes of the Wall Street Journal and the cloistered confines of think tanks like the Heritage Foundation -- appear to believe tax hikes at all times, under any conditions, are bad. Why? Because they interfere with the free market and depress the economy.

Here's one other guy who holds that position: Mike Ferguson. He's even signed a pledge that reads:

I ,____________, pledge to the taxpayers of the _____ district of the State of _________ and to the American People that I will:

ONE, oppose any and all efforts to increase the marginal income tax rates for individuals and/or businesses; and

TWO, oppose any net reduction or elimination of deductions and credits, unless matched dollar for dollar by further reducing tax rates.

It doesn't matter if we have been attacked, are at war, have the worst natural disaster in history, a five year stalled economy, or a record deficit and record new federal spending. Mike Ferguson says he will never consider raising taxes under any circumstance.

But sometimes tax increases are needed, and make the lives of ordinary Americans better. Farmer lays out the historical lesson of the last 20 years:

And despite the insistence of the editorial imams at the Journal, tax increases do not always depress the economy or reduce federal revenue, as George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton demonstrated.

With the country in a slump at the start of the 1990s -- largely the product of Reagan-era tax cuts and exploding deficits, the model for this Bush administration -- the first Bush and then Clinton pushed through tax increases. Conservatives in the media and Congress went ballistic. Bob Dole, the Senate Republican leader at the time, predicted a profound recession. Nothing of the sort happened.

Instead, economic activity increased smartly, and the Bush and Clinton tax rate hikes were perfectly timed to take advantage of that rebound in the form of huge federal revenue gains. As a result, the annual budget deficit was wiped out and the incoming administration of the younger Bush was given the gift of a roughly $250 billion surplus -- which, of course, it has transformed into a $330 billion deficit.

One Republican and one Demcoratic president raised taxes, and the best economic times this country has ever seen resulted. It doesn't always happen, and at some times cutting taxes is the best strategy.

But refusing to consider the possibility of increasing taxes to fund increased spending is, in Mr. Farmer's words, "lunatic."

via ChangeNJ.com, a new public policy site for progressives.

Posted by admin at 06:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Congressman Ferguson has responded to a constituent about the suspension of Davis-Bacon rules in the reconstruction of the areas devastated by Hurricane Katrina, and has once again demonstrated an effort to take all sides of the issue.

He comes out very strong for Davis-Bacon, then suggests that he would be fine if it were suspended through Election Day – November 8, 2005. If, as Rep. Ferguson asserts, paying lower wages damages the quality of work then why allow the first two months of work recovering from Katrina to be done with Davis-Bacon suspended.

Also confusing is Rep. Ferguson's reference to a letter to President Bush signed by "many of my [Ferguson's] House colleagues" on September 15 regarding this issue. To date this is the first I have heard of such a letter. On September 16 another constituent called Congressman Ferguson's office and was told that they were still configuring a response.

Here is Rep. Ferguson's complete response, with only the constituent's name and address removed. Please put your reactions and anything you see in the comments.

September 22, 2005

Dear NAME REDACRED

Thank you for contacting me regarding the suspension of Davis-Bacon in the states affected by Hurricane Katrina. I appreciate hearing from you and having the benefit of your views.

President Bush on September 8, 2005, indefinitely suspended provisions of the 1931 Davis-Bacon Act in portions of Alabama, Florida, Louisiana and Mississippi. Davis-Bacon requires contractors on federally funded projects to provide employees with prevailing local wages and benefits.

President Bush's decision has the effect of permitting the payment of less than the locally prevailing wage on contracts for the construction or repair of public buildings and public works in the affected states. Under Davis-Bacon, a president can suspend the law by declaring a "national emergency." The law has previously been suspended by President Franklin Roosevelt in 1934, by President Richard Nixon in 1971 and by President George H.W. Bush in 1992.

Like you, I have serious concerns about the indefinite suspension of Davis-Bacon. Although rebuilding the Gulf Coast region in a fiscally responsible manner should remain a top priority for every member of Congress, I believe progress on reconstruction should not come at the expense of workers' wages and livelihoods.

On September 15, 2005, I joined many of my House colleagues in writing to President Bush to express our "severe concern" about the suspension of Davis-Bacon and urged that he "immediately provide a date certain for the termination of the proclamation suspending Davis-Bacon of no later than November 8, 2005."

The White House contends that suspending Davis-Bacon in the four states will reduce rebuilding costs.

I disagree.

In the letter to President Bush, we addressed this point: "Numerous studies demonstrate that there are a wide variety of factors which affect the cost of construction projects [with labor] costs often [accounting] for less than one-third of total construction costs..These studies further show that prevailing wages attract workers with more experience and training, who are more productive than less-skilled, lower-paid workers. This increased productivity results in completion of construction projects in less time, lowering overall costs. It has also been shown time and again that projects built by less skilled employees drive up the costs associated with long-term maintenance, repair and reconstruction .. Davis-Bacon prevailing wages will not drive up the reconstruction costs in the Gulf region; rather they will help ensure quality work and fair wages for those impacted by the storm.

I have supported Davis-Bacon since I became a member of Congress in 2001. For example, I joined several of my House colleagues on February 4, 2003, in a letter to House Speaker Dennis Hastert stating: "Davis-Bacon is important to the country's construction industry and to construction workers, union and non-union, whose standard of living is often predicated upon this law."

No votes on Davis-Bacon have occurred in the House since 1997.

I will continue to urge that President Bush establish a date certain for terminating his suspension of Davis-Bacon.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions, and please visit my website at www.house.gov/Ferguson for more information on issues important to New Jersey's 7th Congressional District.

Sincerely,

Mike Ferguson
Member of Congress

Please do not respond to this email; this account cannot receive email. To contact Congressman Ferguson, please use the email function on the website www.house.gov/ferguson.

Posted by admin at 06:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (5)

Alexander Strategies threw a big fundraiser for Congressman Mike Ferguson Tuesday in Washington, D.C. Rep. Ferguson took in tens of thousands of dollars for his campaign coffers.

Who is Alexander Strategies close to in DC? None other than Tom DeLay, the center of campaign finance firestorms from Texas to DC.

TRM was a spin-off of DeLay's Americans for a Republican Majority [who have given Mike Ferguson more than $50,000] and worked in conjunction with business committees to help the GOP in the 2002 elections take control of the Texas House for the first time since Reconstruction. That resulted in the election of party stalwart Tom Craddick as speaker.

The payoff for DeLay was a congressional redistricting bill that likely will give Republicans seven Texas seats in the U.S. House that they did not hold in 2002. That will enhance DeLay's chances of someday becoming U.S. speaker, the powerful gatekeeper for federal legislation and second in line of succession to the presidency.

TRM was overseen by DeLay's national political director Jim Ellis, along with ARMPAC consultant Colyandro. DeLay's daughter Danielle Ferro was a TRM staff fund-raiser. DeLay national fund-raiser Warren Robold coordinated the campaign to collect corporate money. And TRM also employed Terry Allen of Washington-based Alexander Strategies, a firm run by former DeLay chief of staff Ed Buckham.

Not only is Alexander Strategies tied in with Tom DeLay, but also heavily with energy firms like Enron and Koch Industries:

Alexander Strategies Lobbies for Huge Energy Clients – Even Enron. Alexander Strategies lobbies on behalf of many large energy clients, including Nevada Hydro, Excel Energy, the National Petrochemical Refiners Association, and Koch Industries, and Lyondell Chemical Company. ASG even used to lobby on behalf of Enron Corporation. [Senate Office of Public Records, sopr.senate.gov]

Mike Ferguson gets so much money from Tom DeLay and his cronies from the Texas oil industry that last year Rep. Ferguson started sending money back to Texas congressional candidates. He sent a total of $27,000 from his own PAC to DeLay supported candidates, almost half of his total contributions and a LOT more than the $1,000 he gave to NJ Republicans.

Meanwhile back in New Jersey's 7th District, Rep. Ferguson's constituents are seeing oil prices as high as $3.50 a gallon and nothing is being done in DC to fix that. In fact, Congressman Ferguson has even voted in ways that made the problem worse:

Ferguson Voted Against Immediate Relief and a Stop to Gouging. In 2005, Ferguson voted against an energy plan that would bring immediate relief to consumers at the pump, increase the nation's investment into renewable fuels and energy efficiency and crack down on price gouging. This vote was also against a measure that would have, directed the Federal Trade Commission and Attorney General to exercise vigorous oversight over the oil markets to protect the American people from price gouging and unfair practices at the gasoline pump. [H.R. 6, Roll Call #118, 4/20/05]

Ferguson Opposed Protecting Consumers From Energy Rip-Offs. In 2005, Ferguson voted to defeat a proposal that would have helped prevent future Enron-like debacles by providing the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) broad authority to deter and punish fraudulent behavior that distorts electricity and natural gas markets. The plan would also ensure FERC has authority to issue refunds for all electricity overcharges like those that West Coast consumers suffered through in 2000-2001. [HR 6, Roll Call #123, 4/20/05]

Tell Mike Ferguson to stop kissing up to Tom DeLay's cronies and start supporting the people of New Jersey. Please call Congressman Ferguson's office at 908-757-7835 or write him on his website and tell him that he is supposed to be representing NJ, not Texas.

You can ask the same question in newspapers by writing to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

Posted by admin at 07:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

In an article announcing the candidacy of Joe Tricarico against incumbent Congressman Mike Ferguson in NJ's 7th District, Ferguson spokesperson Abby Bird let slip her boss' real measure of success.

Abby Bird, press secretary for Rep. Ferguson, cited the incumbent's successes leading into the race.

"Congressman Ferguson has a solid record of accomplishment, as evidenced by twice being re-elected by overwhelming majorities of the voters," Ms. Bird said.

That's right. The evidence of Rep. Ferguson's success is that he has been reelected. Not that he has passed any great legislation, brought money to the district or achieved any of his campaign promises.

This is the kind of inside the beltway thinking that lead to poor representation in Washington D.C.

Posted by admin at 07:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Joe Tricarico, the former Mayor of Hillsborough in Somerset County, had declared his candidacy for Congress in New Jersey's second district. He is the first to officially file with the Federal Election Commission and form a candidate committee.

If he wins the Democratic nod, Mr. Tricarico will take on U.S. Rep. Mike Ferguson, who is serving his third term.

"I am running for Congress because too many in D.C. are not doing their jobs, choosing instead to advance partisan agendas and further careers rather than serve people," Mr. Tricarico said. "I will focus on issues such as health care, Social Security, our growing national debt, and the handling of America's security needs."

Mr. Tricarico served as mayor of Hillsborough for three years, beginning in 2000. In addition to serving as mayor, he also served on the Hillsborough Township Committee. He has been a resident of Hillsborough Township for 20 years.

Mr. Tricarico received a law degree from Seton Hall University and is an assistant commissioner at the state Department of Health and Senior Services.

Matt Linfante and Assemblywoman Linda Stender have also expressed interest in the nomination.

Posted by admin at 07:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The Courier News noticed that Homeland Security money is being used by the federal government no to provide protection against terror attacks but for funding regular municipal expenses. They also noticed that Mike Ferguson likes to trumpet the misuse of Homeland Security funds as pork instead of working to right for real security in our state.

Meanwhile, it's readily apparent that many of these equipment upgrades represent wants more than needs. Earlier this year, state records showed that nearly two-thirds of the homeland security grants awarded in New Jersey over three years hadn't yet been spent -- more than $14 million worth.

It's no coincidence that the latest Hunterdon awards were trumpeted last week by U.S. Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-New Providence. From the beginning in the 9/11 aftermath, homeland security funding decisions have been scarred by pork-barrel politics. And the reality is that a Lebanon Township receiving more than $300,000 in two years smacks of pork.[snip]

Federal and state officials need to better differentiate between what local first responders would like to have for normal public safety and what they truly should have for regional homeland security.

Considering the lack of federal funds going into securing transit and our ports, this is a good point.

Posted by admin at 04:26 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

One of the first things that President Bush did after Hurricane Katrina ripped through the Gulf Coast was suspend a 75 year old law called the Davis-Bacon Act* that requires federal contractors working on public buildings and works to pay the local prevailing wages and benefits. This ensures that federal dollars are not being used to undercut local labor and hurt the local economy.

Government contractors will be able to pay low wages to their employees -- even shipping them in from outside the region -- with the potential for huge cost savings. The Denver Post reports that the savings for the contractors do not necessarily have to pass back to taxpayers:

Bush's proclamation suspending Davis-Bacon made no effort to ensure that that the savings that contractors will reap be passed on to the taxpayers.

Josh Marshall of TalkingPoints Memo writes that this is a very unusual move:

As far as we can tell ... the Davis-Bacon Act has only been suspended in response to a natural disaster once since it was enacted in 1931. That was by the president's father in 1992 in response to Hurricane Andrew -- and that mainly because he needed to appeal to right-wingers in the lead-up to the election.

So here we have a proclamation that overturns 75 years of labor law for only the second time, allows contractors to lower their costs yet guarantees no savings for the American taxpayers.

Congressman Mike Ferguson was called by a constituent to see where he stands on this effort to cut wages for people who are trying to get by after the worst natural disaster in years.

I just called the DC office of Congressman Mike Ferguson (R - NJ7), my rep (unfortunately) and asked "does the congressman support the suspension of the Davis-Bacon Act of 1931 as it relates to the reconstruction in New Orleans" and was told "this is an area of deep concern for the congressman - he's working now to make sure that the suspension is only temporary."

"How temporary?" I asked.

"Well, that's the million dollar question, and we're working really hard on that right now."

My take is that he supports the suspension and this is the PR response. Of COURSE it's temporary - as soon as the reconstruction of New Orleans is complete the suspension will be lifted.

This was on Friday. If they are "working really hard" on the question they should have had some movement on how long they think that people working to rebuild New Orleans and the surrounding areas should be paid sub-standard wages with our tax dollars.

So please call Congressman Ferguson's office at 908-757-7835 or write him on his website and ask for a definitive position on the suspension of Davis-Bacon.

Then send the Congressman's staffers' responses to dumpmike@gmail.com or mail copies to Blue 7th PAC, 184 Sandford Avenue, North Plainfield, NJ 07060.

Posted by admin at 06:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

In April Mike Ferguson voted to allow the federal government to force states such as New Jersey to place liquified natural gas (LNG) transfer stations off their shores. Traditionally, of course, conservatives like Rep. Ferguson prefer to leave such decisions to the states.

The proponents suggested that states were being too stingy with allowing these terminals and the result was higher delivery costs and consumer prices. The opponents suggest that states should be allowed to determine whether potentially dangerous facilities that would be easy targets for terrorists and not be forced to host them against their will.

Now Congressman Ferguson has, in a largely party line vote, voted against an amendment to the Coast Guard appropriations bill that would require the Coast Guard to "conduct a comprehensive security and safety review of liquefied natural gas facilities."

Why would Congressman Ferguson vote to force New Jersey to put dangerous LNG transfer stations off its shore, but vote against comprehensive security and review of such facilities? I have to say, I don't know.

So let's ask him. Please send the Congressman a note or call his office at 908-757-7835 and ask why he voted to take the LNG decision away from the people of New Jersey and refuse to do security and safety reviews at the same time.

Posted by admin at 08:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Congressman Mike Ferguson appears to believe that the federal government is funded by some source other than taxation. There is really no other way to explain his willingness to vote for record budget increases, pork filled transportation bills, over $200 billion for the Iraq War and more than $50 billion for relief for Katrina and still want to cut taxes!

"The economy has taken a real hit," says Rep. Mike Ferguson (R-7th Dist.). "We shouldn't give it another hit by raising taxes, or allowing tax cuts to expire."

Congressman Ferguson voted earlier this year to repeal the estate tax and says he wants to "lower the tax rate for dividends and capital gains." These taxes cut revenue to pay for budgets, transportation, war and relief but don't do much to help anyone making less than the top incomes in the country.

The most likely move is an extension of tax cuts on stock dividends and capital gains that were scheduled to expire in 2008. More than half the money would go to the wealthiest 0.2 percent of the population, those with annual incomes over $1 million, according to a joint study of the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute.

Congressman Ferguson wants to cut taxes for the rich while increasing spending drastically. If we ran our households like this -- reducing income and increasing spending -- we'd wind up in bankruptcy in no time. Except that Congressman Ferguson voted earlier this year to make it harder for middle class folks to declare bankruptcy.

It's not a question of whether this dollar spent or that dollar spent is right or wrong. It's simply a question of whether Congressman Ferguson should continue spending money he doesn't have and driving our country deeper and deeper into debt and national financial crisis.

We should take a second to write Congressman Ferguson on his website or call his office at 908-757-7835 and ask how he intends to pay for all this spending.

You can ask the same question in newspapers by writing to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

Posted by admin at 07:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

In late August we asked "Where was Mike?" in reference to his absence in fighting to save Fort Monmouth. [emphasis added]

Now we get to ask where Mike Ferguson is when the hard questions come from the press.

Spending nearly a month camped outside President Bush's ranch in Texas evidently has done little to blunt Cindy Sheehan's condemnation of the war in Iraq and the continuing American military presence there.

In a visit yesterday to Central Jersey, the media-dubbed "Peace Mom" said U.S. troops should be pulled out of Iraq as soon as would be possible without worsening violence, to prevent more soldiers from "dying for lies and deceptions."

"This war is taking a terrible, terrible toll on our country," she said, standing outside the Town Hall in Westfield, with Rep. Frank Pallone, D-6th Dist., at her side. [snip]

Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-7th Dist., whose congressional district includes Westfield, did not return calls for comment on Sheehan's visit yesterday. A spokeswoman in his Washington, D.C., office, Abby Bird, offered a one-line statement.

"The congressman believes Ms. Sheehan is entitled to her opinion," she said.

We know what Rep. Ferguson thought about President Bush's visit to Westfield, NJ in March. Why won't he tell us about opposition voices in the same city? It's not like he doesn't have time to talk to reporters when the story is good for his image.

Well, let's find out what Mike Ferguson thinks of Cindy Sheehan's visit to his district. Write or call his office at 908-757-7835 and ask him.

You can ask the same question in newspapers by writing to the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

Posted by admin at 05:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The recent Newsweek poll has an interesting factoid for people who are trying to defeat an incumbent Republican.

Reflecting the tarnished view of the administration, only 38 percent of registered voters say they would vote for a Republican for Congress if the Congressional elections were held today, while 50 say they would vote for a Democrat.

Remember that Roll Call (May 20, 2002 issue) reports that in 2000 Al Gore won 54 percent of the vote in the old 7th Congressional District, and would have still won 51 percent of the vote in the new district. Democrats can win here, and the environment is turning in our favor.

But you have to keep up the pressure by by writing letters to the editor to local and regional papers: the Courier News at letters@c-n.com, the Home News Tribune at letters@thnt.com, the Star Ledger at eletters@starledger.com, or the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com.

We will be distributing new fact sheets about Congressman Mike Ferguson in the next week, so please keep an eye out for them and write letters to the editor to let people know about Rep. Michael Ferguson.

Posted by admin at 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)