Dump Mike Ferguson (NJ7)

It's not as catchy as "Stender is a Spender," but it turns out Mike Ferguson is a spender – and he's a tax raiser, too! Looks like he may have lost his only campaign item against Linda Stender should she decide to run again in 2008.

Because last week Mike voted for the Democrats' Creating Long-Term Energy Alternatives for the Nation Act (HR6) which the House Republican Study Conference calls, "$7.7 billion in tax increases over ten years, PLUS $6.3 billion in new royalty payments over the same period. (CBO, JCT)"

In all her years in the Assembly, on the Union County Freeholder Board, and as a Fanwood Mayor and Councilwoman Linda Stender never voted for an unbalanced budget. Sometimes that required voting for increases in taxes, but all 20 years of votes combined didn't add up to this single vote of Mike Ferguson's.

Assuming Stender runs again in 2008, Ferguson will now be unable to trot out the tax increasing, spender image he tried to tar Stender with because he'll just be further demonstrating his hypocrisy. We know he's increased spending and deficits in his time (see below), and now he is raising taxes.

And after he had signed a pledge for Grover Norquist saying he would never vote to raise taxes. Norquist gave Ferguson an award he'll probably be taking back now, and we've got the art to prove it!

Continue reading "Mike Ferguson is a Spender, And A Tax Raiser Too!" »

Posted by admin at 06:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In 1948 President Harry Truman labeled the Congress "Do Nothing" because they only met 110 days the whole year. In 2006, the Republican Congress blew that record away by meeting a grand total of 94 days. As a result of missing so many work days, there was a lot that just didn't get done.

One of the things that didn't get done was passing a budget for the 2006-2007 fiscal year, instead passing what "continuing resolutions" that maintain the spending of the previous year. This is usually done as a stop-gap effort as the Congress works to complete the bills. That means that four months into the fiscal year we don't have a budget determining how much money will be spent on what programs.

Essentially, they wanted to pass the buck to the new Democratic majority to let them make the hard decisions the Republicans were not willing to make. It was a political, partisan decision meant to make the Democrats look bad.

Now the Democrats are in control and are looking to pass a budget that is responsible and doesn't increase the deficit. And one of the ways they are doing it is by removing all the earmarks put in last year.

For us in the 7th District that means that the inaction by the Republican Congress in 2006 may cost Mike Ferguson's district about $4.15 million this year for a variety of projects that Ferguson had bragged about getting. In short, he bragged about the funding before he and his colleagues did the work to get the funding, and now it may be lost.

The list of potentially lost funding in our district is taken from the Record list of New Jersey's endangered earmarks. Where possible we linked to Ferguson's bragging on the funding.

Posted by admin at 02:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The Republican-led House and Senate took their election vacation without finishing their jobs, and left the federal budget -- which starts in July -- unfinished. This allowed Representatives like Mike Ferguson to come home to face the voters without having cast the tough votes needed to determine spending and taxes for the next fiscal year.

The idea was that after the election the lame duck Congress would come back to work and finish the job in November and December. That way government agencies would know how much to spend and what work they could do, and the IRS could prepare all the documents to collect taxes with. Many people, particularly those owed rebates, file their taxes in January to get their money back faster.

But the Republican-led Congress has decided to pass it's responsibility off to the Democratically controlled Congress in January, and as a result the Wall Street Journal is reporting the IRS sees trouble ahead.

IRS asks taxpayers to check legislative status before filing since “We have to be flexible.”

Passing off their responsibilities to the future is really not unusual budgeting behavior for these guys, since they have repeatedly increased the federal spending without finding new revenues and pay for it by borrowing money. Future taxpayers will have to not only pay for the federal spending in future years, but also for the borrowing and debt that paid for current spending.

And now they aren't even willing to go that far. Mike Ferguson and his buddies are happy to pass off work they already should have completed first after the election and now after they are no longer in power.

Posted by admin at 09:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The Bernardsville News is the first paper to give an endorsement in the NJ7 Congressional race between Mike Ferguson and Linda Stender. The nod went to Linda Stender. The paper is not too big and a weekly, but it is in extremely red territory and hopefully this kind of thing can make a difference there.

[UPDATE: The Hunterdon Review, also owned by Recorder, used the same editorial last week. Deep in the heart of redness!]

Vote for Linda Stender for Congress from the Seventh District.

She is articulate and bright. She has had local, county and state government experiences. Most importantly, she represents an end to the status quo acceptance of the failed policies of the Bush Administration, so unquestionably accepted by her opponent, Republican incumbent Michael Ferguson.

His response to the surprisingly strong Stender campaign is to blast Stender as a tax and spend Democrat.

Yet Stender, as a state Assemblywoman, voted against the Corzine budget and increased sales tax. Meanwhile, Ferguson, as member of the Republican-controlled U.S. Senate, has presided over a federal budget that has gone from a surplus position to a massive deficit.

It is ironic he complains about doings as the state level, yet he has never served in any state or locally elected office in his career. In fact, he only moved to the Seventh Congressional district so he could run for Congress after he lost his bid for a Sixth District Congressional seat in Monmouth County in 1998.

Nearly 60 percent of the district considers themselves Independent and we think Stender will more accurately reflect their philosophies than Ferguson.

We support Stender’s call for a re-examination of how we are conducting the war in Iraq, a position also called for by many retired Army generals and the majority of the nation. Ferguson is unquestioning of the Bush Administration’s handling of the war.

We support Stender’s call for embryonic stem cell research, so those whose loved ones are suffering from anything from Parkinson’s to Alzheimer’s to diabetes to paralysis may have hope for a cure. Ferguson staunchly opposes embryonic stem cell research and as such has earned the disfavor of Tricia Riccio, a crusader from Warren Township whose son Carl Riccio was paralyzed in a Watchung Hills Regional High School wrestling match in 2003.

Stender favors a woman’s right to choose on abortion, developing alternative energy supplies, and protecting the environment.

None of those issues carry much weight with Ferguson. He is anti-choice to the point of wanting to amend the Constitution to make abortion a crime even in the cases of rape and incest.

He garnered a pitiful 17 percent approval rating from the League of Conservation Voters, the political voice of the national environmental movement whose ratings reflect Ferguson’s voting record on key environmental and public health votes. Ferguson’s environmental rating is the lowest of the 13 members of the New Jersey congressional delegation, Democrats and Republicans alike.

Environmental issues are part of the core values of Somerset and Hunterdon county residents and those values should be represented in the halls of Congress by the person they elect to represent them.

Indeed, poll after poll shows Stender’s positions on the core issues this district thinks are important, from the Bush Administration’s handling of the war in Iraq, to stem cell research, to the environment, are more reflective of the majority of voters in this district than Mr. Ferguson’s. People in the 7th Congressional District should vote for the candidate who best reflects their values on Tuesday, Nov. 7 and that is Linda Stender.

Vote for Stender for Congress from the 7th District.

Posted by admin at 12:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the Independent Press on October 11, 2006:

Ferguson is the real spender

To the editor:

Recently, I saw an ad, put out by Republican Congressman Mike Ferguson that accused Linda Stender, the Democratic challenger, of being a spender.
However, it is the current Republican administration that has spent more money than all previous administrations put together and it is the Republican majority in Congress which has approved those expenditures. As a Republican Congressman who strongly supports his President, Mike Ferguson is the spender.

Barbara Babcock
New Providence

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

The following letter was published in the Courier News on Friday, September 29 2006.

Republicans sink in unethical mire

Yes, I am a Republican of long standing, and it is not easy to write this letter. I have had enough of the rape of this country by Washington and Big Business.

However, with unethical liberal Democrats and ethical conservative Republicans I am truly concerned. In my mind, ethics has to do with power, control, lying, cheating and stealing by individuals, government and business. The greatness of our country was the strong, honest, hard-working middle class. Yes, the economy is booming for the haves and the upper middle class. The rest of the country is faced with lower incomes, unreasonable prices, debt, usury, identity theft, taxation and health costs.

If we sit down and tally the money those unethical Democrats have gobbled up, we will find it is peanuts compared with that involving ethical Republicans. The Republicans, including Mike Ferguson and Tom Kean Jr., support business, the bigger the better, and favors for the haves. They will be asked to support President Bush's ill-conceived plan to return control of world oil to Houston as it was until the '70s. Yes, they may get us a piece of pork such as removing the mercury, which may never happen, or finish the Green Brook flood control, like New Orleans.

We had a famous middle-of-the-road Republican, Mrs. Whitman. We are assured that Tom Kean Jr. and Mike Ferguson will be of the same ilk. Mrs. Whitman reduced the income tax, a tax dedicated to education. The responsibility for education was transferred to the homeowners with questionable assessments. Education spending for status and parity has grown leaps and bounds to the point of taking small homes to increase tax receipts.

Utilities are billed in such a way as to make the poor, the elderly and those trying to conserve pay more per gallon of water, water that may not be fit to drink, than the haves pay. The interest on a small debt can be more than 60 percent APR, while large favored debts are about 20 percent or even less. There are discounts and rebates for some, but not all.

Now there is a big problem. For some time, all people were encouraged to register and vote, and register they did. How does the minority party solve the problem? Rig the ballot boxes, of course. Mind you, not by a lot, just enough to claim victory. It could easily happen here.

If I were you, I would keep my eye on the ethical Conservatives this go-round. Most likely, I will return to the party when it gives up carrying the Bible in one hand and death-dealing cluster bombs in the other while making large profits for big business on others' suffering.

CHARLES B. MOBUS
Warren

Posted by admin at 07:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the September 9, 2006 Courier News:

Stender attacks not based on facts

During the past few weeks, my mailbox has been inundated with condescending ads from Mike Ferguson's campaign with the childish slogan: "Stender is a spender." This distortion of Assemblywoman Linda Stender's record insults the intelligence of 7th District voters.

The trick Mr. Ferguson uses in his ads is a common one during political season: Municipal officials get blamed for rising property taxes when the culprit is usually the school board (in a state with a flawed system for funding public education). So, unless Mr. Ferguson gives me the facts, I'm not buying what he's selling.

Mr. Ferguson should have no credibility with voters in fiscal matters, anyway. Since he was elected in 2000, he has voted for budgets in Washington that turned the federal government's surplus into record budget deficits. The deficit for the budget year ending Sept. 30 is projected to be about $300 billion. In the midst of all this spending, Mr. Ferguson has voted for billions in tax breaks for gas and oil companies during a period of record-breaking profits and sky-high prices at the pump.

I think about Mr. Ferguson's votes every time I pull out my wallet to buy gas. And he thinks I should be worried about tax-and-spend politicians? The ones who scare me right now are those, like Mike Ferguson, who spend ... and spend and spend and spend, leaving a fiscal mess for my kids to mop up. It's time for voters in the 7th District to clean house and elect Linda Stender for Congress on Nov. 7.

SUE REPKO
Skillman

Posted by admin at 04:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the Cranford Chronicle on Thursday, September 7 2006.

Congressman's policies hurt voters To The Chronicle:

Mike Ferguson has been flooding the airwaves and mailboxes trying to paint his opponent a spender. But who is the big spender? Maybe Mike should look at himself.

While in Congress, Mike supported policies that turned a budget surplus into a record budget deficit, borrowing from our kids and stealing their financial future. He voted for the energy plan that gave big benefits to the oil companies and none to us. You can thank Mike each time you fill up at the pump.

He even helped push though the Medicare prescription drug plan that has been a disaster. Instead of helping seniors with their prescription costs, it confused seniors and forced them to buy into plans that ultimately cost them more just as the drug companies wanted.

Mike is trying to run away from his own record and distort his opponent's. He took campaign money from his corrupt friend Tom DeLay and has since refused to give it back. He even spent your tax dollars to send out literature that amounts to campaign mailers.

Who is Mike Ferguson really representing? It certainly is not us. On Election Day, let's tell Mike that we want someone who represents us, not big-money special interests.

ANDREW BUCKO
Cranford

Posted by admin at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the August 29, 2006 Home News Tribune and August 28 Courier News.

Is Mike Ferguson that clueless?

My mail came with new evidence of how clever Rep. Mike Ferguson, R-7th District, was to notice that his opponent Linda Stender's last name rhymes with "spender." If the hypocrisy weren't so blatant, it would be worth a good laugh. Stender has balanced budgets all her career, while Ferguson has helped usher in the largest deficits is our history, turning the 1990's surpluses into record-setting red ink.

I also wonder when I'll get some mail from Ferguson telling me his positions on the difficult issues facing us as a nation. He has grossly abused his privilege in sending postage-free mail to try to convince us that his name is really Congressman Fix-all-the-Potholes, but not one word on how to end the Iraq catastrophe, stop the oil companies from gouging us, or address the grave environmental problems that we in Central Jersey experience only too closely. Has he even thought about these things? I get the impression from his mailings that he doesn't even know about them.

Michael Pratt
SKILLMAN

Posted by admin at 07:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Last week Mike Ferguson started running attack ads and mailings against opponent Linda Stender, plying the old canard that Demcocrats are fiscally irresponsible. The problem is that this is not unly untrue, but that is perfectly describes Mike Ferguson's tenure in the Congress.

Ferguson may be able to rhyme "Stender" and "Spender" but the fact is that Ferguson has increased federal spending by more than $3.3 trillion over his six years in Congress, and increased the debt by $2.8 trillion.

That's right. Not only did Ferguson vote to spend a trillion more dollars a year, but to pass the buck from himself and his rich parents to your grandkids and mine. It's as if he stole our family credit cards and put every single American by more than $9,000 each.

And this is a guy who wants to run a campaign on fiscal responsibility and spending restraint? Trillions of dollars in increased spending? Holy cow! Never voting in his entire career for a balanced budget? Holy cow! Trillions of dollars in increased debt passed on to our grandchildren? Holy cow!

The fact is Ferguson, Tom DeLay, Bob Ney, George Bush and the rest of the Washington Republicans are spending and borrowing us all into the poor house while pretending it's all someone else's fault. It's close to embarassing.

Read the facts in a re-work of Ferguson's recent mailing.

Continue reading "Ferguson Wants to Talk About Spending?" »

Posted by admin at 07:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

If anyone had any worries that Linda Stender was just going to take what Mike Ferguson dished out and not fight back hard, the new radio ad she unleashed today [mp3] should change that notion! Ferguson tried to be clever in his ads calling his opponent, "Linda Stender is a Spender" but the fact is that in Congress Ferguson has voted for record spending, record deficits and record debt.

Linda isn't afraid to point this out, or the fact that Ferguson is trying to hide his record behind clever attack ads. And that gas prices and gas company profits have risen while Ferguson gave tax breaks to oil barons. It's good to hear a competitor like Linda get on the air early and aggressively.

These ads cost a good bit, so be sure to help Linda out by contributing to her campaign on our NJ7 ActBlue page today!

Plus, help spread the word by forwarding the .mp3 of the ad out to all your friends.

You can help keep the pressure on by writing letters to the editor on this and other issues related to Mike Ferguson. The Courier News is 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. More local and weekly publications can be found at Dump Mike Letters.

Posted by admin at 05:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

The following letter was published in the Cranford Chronicle on July 13, 2006.

Ferguson can't move U.S. ahead

Just as the first robin signals the start of spring, so the first political attack letter signals the start of asummer of local campaign-wrangling among the partisan readers of the Chronicle. I join the fray in progress between Messrs.Cantilli and Sassi.

Sassi defends the incumbent Republican Congressman, Mike Ferguson. You are right,Mr. Sassi, Ferguson is a proven loyalist to the Bush line.More billions into the bottomless pit of Iraq? Fine.Give generous tax cuts to the rich to boost the burdened economy?Wonderful. Promote Constitutional amendments to limit freedoms distasteful to the Bible Belt?Go George!

But Ferguson is a relative newcomer to the Washington scene. He is a little dog in the pack who must cater to the leaders in order to get the scraps of federal benefits that may fall to New Jersey.If Ferguson survives to grow stronger, maybe he will develop some guts to be a principled Republican like Specter or Snowe.Or maybe he will become another Santorum.

I prefer to vote for someone who is a proven, principled local leader and hasworked long and hard to promote the interests of all citizens of our county. Linda Stender seems to meet these standards better than Ferguson to represent New Jersey's 7th Congressional district.

However, it is Mr. Sassi's snide comments about "progressive" and "liberals" that really incited me to join this campaign of letters.He parrots the neo-conservatives' exploitation of President Reagan's put-down of the term "liberal" in politics.But the old showman would be embarrassed by the depths of distortion created by Karl Rove and his Rat Pack.

The neo-cons want people to forget that it was leaders of the "liberal" bent that fought to bring us the 40-hour work week, child labor laws, Social Security and civil rights for all citizens of any color, sexor creed.The neo-cons are fighting to make old Republican Trent Lott's dream a reality. Trent yearned for the nation to be under leaders like the young Strom Thurmond, who could "roll back the clock" to the "good old days".

I have no faithin Mike Ferguson having the guts to keep the nation moving forward on the high road.

TOM HARTMAN
Cranford

Posted by admin at 04:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Found this video today from the Linda Stender for Congress campaign linking Mike Ferguson to George Bush's failures. It's really not hard to do. Click to watch the video.

UPDATE: This video is not from the Stender campaign. In fact, it has no disclaimer so we do not know where it comes from. If you know, please put it in the comments!

Posted by admin at 05:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

The following letter was published in the Cranford Chronicle on Thursday, June 29, 2006

No support for the middle class

To The Chronicle:

Another Congressional scorecard has been issued, and U.S. Representative Mike Ferguson has received another failing grade. This new scorecard was released by the Drum Major Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit progressive think tank based in New York. The title of DMI's report is Congress at the Midterm: Their 2005 Middle-Class Record.

Representatives were graded on their votes on eight House bills, which addressed issues such as estate tax repeal, bankruptcy and consumer protection, energy policy, small business health insurance, and cuts in domestic programs. Mike Ferguson scored zero percent and was awarded a grade of "F".

Overall, Republican representatives from New Jersey scored 0-50 percent, and Democrats scored 75-100 percent. With his votes, Ferguson was part of a Congress that, in the report's words, "disdained the concerns of middle-class Americans and opted instead to favor the already wealthy and powerful in vote after vote... (and) championed the wish lists of oil companies, the insurance industry, and credit card issuers over the concerns of middle-class consumers and small businesses."

Let's take a brief look at just one of the eight House votes, the repeal of the estate tax. This tax affects less than 1 percent of the wealthiest American families. Elimination of this tax would cost the United States nearly $1 trillion in lost revenue in the first ten years after repeal. Mike Ferguson voted to eliminate the estate tax. Which domestic programs will he be willing to destroy in order to pay for this trillion-dollar loss? Medicare? Medicaid? College loans? In 2005, Ferguson voted to cut $39 billion from these programs as part of the ironically named "Deficit Reduction Act" -- never mind that the huge federal deficit is largely a result of President Bush's irresponsible and lopsided tax cuts, which were supported by Mike "Rubber Stamp" Ferguson.

According to a recent analysis of national census data by the Brookings Institute, the middle class is shrinking. Between 1970 and 2000, middle-income metropolitan neighborhoods declined from 58 percent to 41 percent, and middle-class suburban neighborhoods decreased from 64 percent to 44 percent. Middle-class families in metro areas fell from 28 percent to less than 22 percent. These shifts have been accompanied by an increase in lower-income families.

Mike Ferguson just wants more of the same. Since 2001, Ferguson's House votes show that he cares most about millionaires and big corporations, and has little regard for middle-class families. How many failing grades must Ferguson receive before we fire him and send him home?

JOHN CANTILLI
Cranford

Posted by admin at 05:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This letter was published in the Courier News on May 15, 2006. No link is available.

Ferguson playing cynical game

I can't figure out Rep. Mike Ferguson. Last December, he touted his support of the Deficit Reduction Act, which narrowly passed the House and ultimately cut the federal budget by $39 billion over the next five years. Most of those cuts affected vital social programs and student loan assistance. At the time, Ferguson said that the "budget represents tough choices and key reforms to reduce the deficit." Though those cuts were harsh, his dedication to deficit reduction was encouraging at a time when budget shortfalls were crippling state and local governments.

Yet on May 10, Ferguson voted in favor of a tax-cut bill that proposes to extend the tax breaks on dividends and capital gains through 2010 (they currently are slated to expire in 2008). This law will reduce federal tax revenue by $70 billion between now and 2010 almost twice the amount "saved" in the name of fiscal responsibility last December. And these tax breaks will only benefit people who have substantial investments in the stock market.

The bill also would protect more taxpayers from having to pay a higher alternative minimum tax a wise portion of the tax code intended to prevent the wealthiest Americans from craftily sheltering all their income from taxation. According to Ferguson, because that law was written in 1969, and has not been adjusted for inflation, it is now impacting 19 million families whose incomes are as "low" as $75,000. While that may be "low" for us in the 7th District, try explaining your need for tax relief to the rest of the country, where the national median income is about $44,000.

The tax cut may be advantageous for the 7th District, but I challenge us all to consider the common wealth over our own self-interest when thinking about tax policy. Whether our government protects the wealthy or the vulnerable is a moral issue of the highest importance.

The refrain risks becoming a cliche why do Republicans continue to push tax cuts benefiting the wealthiest among us?

Is now the time for tax cuts, or for fiscal responsibility? It cannot be time for both. The only justification I can think of for Ferguson's support of these two contrasting bills is that he follows the whims of his party leadership rather than considering the logical impact of his votes. Either that, or he thinks so little of his constituents that he hopes the promise of tax breaks will distract them from Congress's reckless disregard for financial discipline. Are we buying it? Time will tell.

DAVID J. ALLEN
Hillsborough

Posted by admin at 07:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the March 31, 2006 Courier News:

Writer wrong on Rep. Ferguson

To the writer Matthew Moench, who naively boasts, "Republicans and Mike Ferguson want smaller government," I must ask the following question: Huh?

Bush has presided over the largest overall increase in federal government spending in 30 years. Total government spending grew by 33 percent during Bush's first term. The Republican Congress, along with Mike Ferguson's loyal support, has enthusiastically assisted this budget bloat. These are the hard facts provided by the Congressional Budget Office.

So I ask Moench: What is the source of your inaccurate claim? Is it Mike Ferguson's Web site? Or is it Rush Limbaugh's radio show? Or do you just make this stuff up?

JOSH SWEENY
Bridgewater

Posted by admin at 06:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

From the Jan. 19, 2006 issue of the News Record/Patriot and the Jan. 20, 2006 issue of the Atom Tabloid & Citizen~Gazette, a column by Michael Shapiro:

Congressman Ferguson & the Franking Privilege

The franking privilege enables a member of Congress to mail official letters and packages without being charged for postage. Current regulations limit the privilege to correspondence �in which the member deals with the addressee as a citizen of the United States or constituent.�

Typical mail subject to the entitlement includes newsletters, questionnaires, and government publications. The use of the franking privilege is prohibited for mail that is purely personal, related to a political campaign or �laudatory and complimentary.� Because of rampant abuse of the franking privilege by members of Congress and its heavy cost to taxpayers, in 1989 Congress considered eliminating it but decided instead to reduce the number of mailings allowed each year from six to three.

Congressman Mike Ferguson�s mailings are typically double-sided glossy cards showing the Congressman catering to various constituents, with his face pictured prominently in every conceivable scenario. Minimal factual information is provided. Obviously, the mailing is nothing but campaign literature paid for at taxpayer expense.

In his most recent distribution, a double-sided multi-color card with numerous photos, one side features a large portrait of Ferguson with the phrases �Congressman Mike Ferguson� and �Fighting for Us and Delivering for our Communities.� This segment of the mailing, alone, appears to violate the ban on franked mail that is �laudatory or complimentary.� Below these words are pictures of a fireman, children in a classroom, and a doctor speaking with a patient. So far, no information has been provided to Ferguson�s constituency except for extolling the �virtues� of the Congressman.

The second side of the mailing features a large photo of Ferguson with a Coast Guard official and a prominent quote from Ferguson, �I work hard for you and to deliver for Union County.� This side of the mailing is entitled: �Congressman Mike Ferguson� �Delivering for Union County.� Again, this appears to be �laudatory and complimentary� and therefore would violate the proscription on such mailings at taxpayer expense. The remainder of the mailing consists of dollar amounts and the entity in Union County that has received that amount. At the very bottom of the card, in small print, it reads �Appropriations, grants, reclassifications requested or voted for by Congressman Ferguson.� It appears that, at most, the figures listed are monies Congressman Ferguson �helped� procure for Union County. This is the only information provided and is a classic example of abuse of the franking privilege. Congressman Ferguson should be called to task for it.

A missive to constituents in Union County can run upwards of $100,000. Over the course of the year, Congressman Ferguson�s franking privilege allows him to mail to Union County residents three times, amounting to taxpayer expense of approximately $300,000. And for what purpose? So all residents of Union County can be provided campaign propaganda, masked as official literature. Of course, Congressman Ferguson offers similar mailings in the other counties he represents: Middlesex, Hunterdon and Somerset.

If Mr. Ferguson wants to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to mail campaign propaganda to his constituents, he is entitled to do so as an American citizen. But he should not be allowed to do so at taxpayer expense under the guise of the franking privilege. Let him spend some of the millions of dollars he raises for his re-election or some of the wealth he personally owns on this campaign literature masked as franked mail, rather than having his hard-working taxpayer constituents pay for it.

Posted by admin at 06:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

A Courier News editorial takes Mike Ferguson to task for toting water for the Bush adminsitration in the budget vote last week, taking the same position Dump Mike did last week.

In New Jersey, there are more than 124,000 student borrowers who will graduate from college with a sheepskin diploma and an average of $17,000 in student debt. With tuition prices continuing their upward spiral at both public and private universities, it should come as no surprise that more students are going into debt, taking out more loans and struggling to pay them back.

So what did Congress do about this student debt crisis? Instead of helping to pull students out of increasing debt loads, it threw them a shovel. Last week, Congress voted to pass the federal budget reconciliation act, which includes more than $39 billion in funding cuts. More than $12 billion -- roughly 30 percent of the cuts -- will come directly from student loan programs. The cuts are staggering; they are easily the largest cuts in student aid in history.

The mainly party-line vote was decided by a razor-thin margin of 216 to 214 -- one vote would have made the difference. Thirteen moderate Republican congressmen, including Rep. Chris Smith, voted against the bill, citing the vast level of funding cuts. Four of those "no" votes were from Republicans who reversed their votes from last December. Rep. Mike Ferguson, who had expressed concern with parts of the bill and held one of the decisive votes, voted for the budget and the largest student aid cuts in history.

This debt has many consequences. It stops thousands of qualified students every year from attending college in the first place. It causes students to work more and study less while in school -- nearly half of full-time students work 25 hours or more every week. Right now, even with campus jobs, family contributions and federal aid, students still come up short with more than $3,900 in what is euphemistically called "unmet need." For low-income students, it's worse -- more than $4,900 of "unmet need."

Posted by admin at 04:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This letter was published in the February 11, 2006 Courier News:

Ferguson budget vote disappointing

Congressman Mike Ferguson has always claimed to be an independent voice, not in lock-step with the Republican establishment, and ready to break with that establishment to stand up for mainstream New Jersey voters. If that is true, why then did he not join the 13 other Republican moderates in opposing a bill that comes down -- and hard -- on poor senior citizens, college students from the middle class, and moms trying to collect child support from deadbeat dads?

The health-care crisis, as we all know, is severe -- so he makes it necessary for some elderly citizens to have to sell their houses to get the care they need to survive? To compete in the global market, we need hundreds of thousands of new college graduates -- so he makes it much harder for a kid of modest means to get to college? And to make it tougher for moms needing child support to collect? Shocking, beyond the pale.

Mike Ferguson had a chance to back up his words, and he failed. He turned his back on moderate New Jersey voters. He sided with the Delay-Abramoff-K Street project wing of the Republican Party in its war on the middle class. He also supports a tax cut bill that will shower $70 billion mostly on the well-to-do in the next 10 years. Yet he voted to strip away almost $32 billion over five years from some of his most vulnerable constituents. All they had to do was cut the tax cut in half, and these harsh steps could have been avoided.

Mike Ferguson should know better. That he doesn't is, to say the least, disappointing.

MICHAEL PRATT
Skillman

Posted by admin at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)