Dump Mike Ferguson (NJ7)

Over the last two weeks we've found out that Mike Ferguson told Carl Riccio's mother that her son would never walk again, and this week we learned that his staff refused to let 14 year old juvenile diabetes sufferer Lyndsey Rosethal talk to him [listen to her radio ad] about stem cell research.

Now we find that he is refusing to endorse a bill that would ensure drug safety and prevent adverse drug reactions in children solely because the bill was sponsored by Democrats. This is not hyperbole, and the witnesses to this have written the letter below.

“Congressman Mike Ferguson believes every child deserves the best quality health care.” This is what his campaign advertising claims. It might be true if it included the modifier, “in an election year.”

We are N.J. residents whose children’s lives have been threatened by adverse reactions to prescription drugs. We have been meeting with the congressman about drug safety for the last three years. It was only after a huge public outcry that the FDA has finally addressed the potential deadly adverse effects of antidepressants. This has resulted in a black box warning for these drugs as well as a required medication guide to be distributed to parents with each prescription. This guide is meant to fully inform parents of the risks of this category of drugs and their off-label, non-FDA approved use in children and teens. However, we have discovered that these medication guides are not being given to parents as the FDA directed.

We have met with Congressman Ferguson on numerous occasions regarding this matter. We have expressed our hope that he might intervene, as our elected representative, to ensure that this common sense and life-saving regulation is enforced. We have also asked him to sign on to existing bills that ensure and enhance drug safety. While he assured us that he cared about children’s safety, he informed us that he would not sign on to any bill that had been sponsored by a Democratic member of Congress. Apparently, partisan politics is more important than the well-being of the children of New Jersey.

He said this not only in our presence, but in the presence of our children who almost lost their lives.

Despite this setback, we have continued to speak with his staff on this issue; however, over the past year the congressman refused to meet with us personally. We have traveled to Washington multiple times to fight for the children of New Jersey with no response from the congressman. Amazingly, three months before the election we were invited to meet with his senior staff to discuss this issue. This meeting resulted in a letter from the congressman to the FDA demanding answers on this subject on August 31, 2006.

This is a full year after it was brought to his attention, two weeks prior to the Institute of Medicine’s scathing report on the inadequacies of the FDA, and just weeks before Election Day. This is simply too convenient to be coincidental!

To date the Congressman, the Vice Chairman of the Subcommittee on Health, has neither signed on nor initiated any legislation for drug safety.

Laurie Yorke
Lisa Van Syckel
Michelle Van Syckel
Ryan Yorke
Nicole Cumber-Teen victim
Dawn Jeronowitz

Mike Ferguson says he is pro-life, pro-family and supports moral values but his actions in refusing to help these parents of sick and injured children tell a completely different story.

Wrong choices. Wrong Congressman.

Contribute to Linda Stender today for a new House and a new future.

Posted by admin at 03:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

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)

Congressman Mike Ferguson makes a big deal of his support for tax cuts slated to the richest members of our society. Often he – and many other Republicans -- claims that the Bush tax cuts make our economy stronger and more competitive. It turns out that, according to the Wall Street Journal, that is just not true.

To start, the impact of the Bush tax cuts mean more money in some folks' pockets. That is, on the face of it, a good thing. But the problem is that while cutting taxes reduces revenues, President Bush and Congressman Ferguson have been drastically increasing spending. And when you reduce revenues and increase spending you get deficits.

This chart is from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office's August 2006 The Budget and Economic Outlook [PDF]:

When Ferguson and Bush took office there was no deficit, and we were paying down the national debt. Immediately after their first budget and the massive tax cuts the deficit started to grow. Keep in mind that this chart doesn’t include off-budget items like the $300 billion for the War in Iraq, which makes the deficit all the higher.

The Congressional Budget Office concurs with this simple bit of math, and in 2005 noted that:

The new numbers confirm what many analysts have predicted for some time: that budget deficits in the decade ahead will stem less from the lingering effects of the downturn and much more from rising government spending and progressively deeper tax cuts.

Continue reading "Mike Ferguson's Economic Policies Make the United States Weaker" »

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

Congressman Mike Ferguson repeatedly stands up and defends the Bush Administration's No Child Left Behind and other educational policies, standing on his history as an "educator" to demonstrate his patriotic and pure love of children.

But when the Bush administration is proven to fail in educating children, all you hear from Ferguson are the crickets in the background. Chirp, chirp, chirp.

For instance, you will hear nothing from his campaign or constituent office about this:

A scorching internal review of the Bush administration’s reading program says the Education Department ignored the law and ethical standards to steer money how it wanted.

The government audit is unsparing in its review of how Reading First, a billion-dollar program each year, that it says has been beset by conflicts of interest and willful mismanagement. It suggests the department broke the law by trying to dictate which curriculum schools must use.

It also depicts a program in which review panels were stacked with people who shared the director’s views and in which only favored publishers of reading curricula could get money.

That's not a liberal blog attacking the administration, or a Democratic Congressman. That is the administration's own assessment of the program -- that is is run illegally, incompetently and corruptly.

That's our money -- our tax money -- being wasted on campaign supporters, and Mike Ferguson won't say a word.

Those are our children being shortchanged on their educations, and Mike Ferguson won't say a word.

These are the true colors of Mike Ferguson, a pure Bush-supporter who stands up for his leader and not for his constituents.

Chirp, chirp, chirp.

Posted by admin at 05:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

For all the talk of Mike Ferguson being beholden to Tom DeLay's crowd, Jack Abramoff, President Bush and the lobbyists who fill his campaign accounts, we often miss the fact that his votes usually benefit himself as the son of rich parents who have already given him a million dollars and will give him more as inheritance.

The recent House vote on the minimum wage is a perfect example. Ferguson had the opportunity to do good for the working poor of our nation, and instead tried to do well for himself.

The original idea was fairly simple: raise the national minimum wage from $5.15 to $7.25 an hour over the next two years. This means a person working 40 hours a week with no vacations or days off would get a raise from $10,775 to $15,175 (approximately).

It's not a lot, but an extra $4,500 or so is nothing to sneeze at for someone making $50,000. For someone making $10K it's a huge increase. It would also be the first increase in the national minimum wage since 1997.

Just for reference, 2006 federal poverty guidelines put the poverty level for a single person at $14,700. Even with the increase (and assuming the poverty level doesn’t rise) this increase would mean a person working full time with no breaks would make less than $500 more than poverty in 2009.

Mike Ferguson voted against this bill, refusing to bring it to the floor for an up or down vote.

Why? Because the Republican leadership wanted to tack on an Estate Tax Cut to the bill, which would give the children of rich parents a massive tax break when they inherit the family wealth. Ferguson voted for that bill, tying a minimum wage hike allowing the working poor to exceed poverty by less than $500 so he could get a tax break on the family wealth.

Remember, this is a guy who has voted repeatedly to accept raises himself. He made $141,300 in 2001 when he first took office, and in 2007 will make $168,500. That's a pay increase of $27,2300 -- more than twice what a full-time minimum wage worker makes today.

Even worse, New Jersey raised its minimum wage to $7.15 as of this October so by blocking a national minimum wage increase he is allowing employers in surrounding states to pay lower wages, taking jobs out of New Jersey at a time when employment is hard to get.

He accepted his own raises, but refused to give the working poor a raise unless he also got a massive tax break on his inheritance.

Wrong choices, wrong Congressman. Mike Ferguson.

Posted by admin at 07:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Linda Stender's latest campaign piece [see it in PDF, or in PNG after the jump] hit mailboxes today, again slamming Mike Ferguson (R-NJ7) for opposing promising new avenues of medical research.

This is the first time they have used the new theme, "Why Mike? Why?" in a literature piece, and it comes on the same day they launched a website by the same name. It looks like this is going to be the new theme for the campaign.

It works on a couple of levels. The first is plaintive, asking, "Why do you vote/behave/think like that, Mike? Why?" The second is, "Why should I vote for Mike if he doesn't represent my values? Why?"

The positive hit for Stender:

Linda Stender supports stem cell research to give our families hope. As a member of the state Legislature, Linda has been a leader in funding research efforts in New Jersey.

As a member of Congress, Linda will support stem cell research to unlock cures for illnesses that harm our loved ones.

Tuesday, November 7th Vote Stender for Congress

The negative on Ferguson:

But Congressman Mike Ferguson VOTES AGAINST HOPE

Ferguson opposes embryonic stem cell research that could unlock cures for cancer, Alzheimer's and diabetes.

Ferguson marches lock-step wit President Bush and other ideologues that put their narrow views before science -- and before hope.

Why Mike? Why?
For more information, visit www.whymikewhy.com

This is probably her best lit piece I've seen, and the Why Mike? Why? theme might work if it is used properly.

Continue reading "Stender Mailer: Mike Ferguson Opposes Embryonic Stem Cell Research" »

Posted by admin at 08:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Well, apparently all we have to do is wish for things and they appear! Here is Linda Stender's new television ad about her campaign against Mike Ferguson here in New Jersey's 7th Congressional District. Enjoy:

Posted by admin at 11:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Linda Stender is hitting back at Mike Ferguson with mailings, a radio ad and -- from what I hear -- a television ad up on cable. I haven't seen it, but if you have put it in the comments. These three posts are the current pieces going out in the mail.

The second is about Ferguson's unlimited support for President George Bush's policies both domestically and internationally. You can click on either image to get to a pdf of the piece and mail it to your friends.

Front

Back

Posted by admin at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Linda Stender is hitting back at Mike Ferguson with mailings, a radio ad and -- from what I hear -- a television ad up on cable. I haven't seen it, but if you have put it in the comments. These three posts are the current pieces going out in the mail.

The first is about Ferguson's unlimited support for President George Bush's Stay the Course strategy on the Iraq War. You can click on either image to get to a pdf of the piece and mail it to your friends.

Front

Back

Posted by admin at 09:40 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)

NETWORK, a Catholic organization dedicated to social justice, gives out an annual report card on all House and Senate members. They gave Congressman Mike Ferguson a zero (0) for the 2005-2006 cycle.

That's right, a Catholic organization started by 47 nuns gave Michael Ferguson a 0 for his concern for the poor, minorities, immigrants and the people of Iraq.

Here's a picture of these nice folks:

Here's their description:

Through lobbying and legislative advocacy, we strive to close the gap between rich and poor and to dismantle policies rooted in racism, greed and violence.

NETWORK’s membership, which includes both individuals and organizations, represents more than 100,000 people. This vast constituency is committed and active. When our national office puts out the word that Congress needs to hear from our members on critical legislation, our members respond by calling, writing, emailing or visiting their Senators and Representatives, and by mobilizing others to take action as well.

Since our founding in 1971 by 47 Catholic sisters, NETWORK has been faithfully answering the Gospel call to act for justice.

Posted by admin at 06:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

Though he is no longer a sponsor of the bill, Mike Ferguson voted today to pass a Constitutional Amendment banning gays from being legally married.

When he first ran for Congress, Ferguson had the endorsement of the left of center Human Rights Campaign and the right of center Log Cabin Republicans because he presented himself as a moderate on gay rights issues. He has since lost the support of both organizations because of his lurch to the radical right.

It is the same with his environmental record. In 2000 and 2002 Ferguson pretended to be a moderate and received the support of organizations such as the League of Conservation Voters and the Sierra Club. He has since jumped onto the right wing Republican bandwagon and lost the support of every single environmental group that backed him in the past.

Ferguson introduced himself to the public as a moderate Republican and has tried to maintain that facade. The truth is not in his flyers and website, but in his votes. And in his votes he is 100 percent in line with the right wing Republicans currently running DC and our country into the poor house.

UPDATE: After the jump

Continue reading "Mike Ferguson Moves To The Right Again" »

Posted by admin at 07:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

The following letter to the editor was published in the July 17, 2006 Courier News:

Paper trail bill for e-votes needs help

My representative, Mike Ferguson, needs to step up and co-sponsor H.R.550. For more than a year, this bill has languished in committee. Simply put, this legislation will require a paper backup for each electronic vote made. Should a malfunction occur or a recount be required, there will be a paper trail for each vote.

Lou Dobbs devoted 10 nights of coverage on CNN to the vulnerabilities of paperless voting. Both parties will benefit from this legislation. Inaction will cause only greater problems for our country in November 2007 and succeeding elections.

Democracy is threatened. Congressman Ferguson, take action now.

WILLIAM R. HULL
Martinsville

Posted by admin at 08:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The following letter was published in the Courier News on July 6, 2006:

Contact Ferguson on Internet bill

There currently is a battle going on that most people don't know about that could change how we use the Internet. Right now, cable and telecom companies cannot (legally) control what sites you visit and how quickly different sites come in. That could change very soon. Legislation being debated in the Senate and House (co-sponsored by Rep. Mike Ferguson) will let these companies control bandwidth or block sites they do not agree with.

This means that if you want information about competitors, you could be blocked. If you want a Web site advertising your small business to be seen, you might have to pay the companies an extra fee or your page might load extra slowly. If you want certain pages to load for you, you might have to pay a service fee to the company to get the service you already get right now. This is nothing short of censorship and extortion.

If you think this is a bad idea, please give your representatives a call, and since he is a sponsor and will not change his position, let Mike Ferguson know what you think by voting for Linda Stender in November, who is strongly against this legislation.

MATTHEW DAWSON
Hillsborough

For an easy to understand discussion on Net Neutrality, visit the Blue Jersey blog:

On the Internet you can access anything that people put out there. On Cable TV, the cable company decides what content they will allow you to access.

We've seen an excellent example in the past few years as the Yankees and Mets started their own cable TV stations to carry their games. Some cable TV companies quickly agreed to carry the new stations, while others did not.

As a result, many fans were unable to watch their beloved team's games, while other fans could. Why? Because the cable delivery companies wanted the stations to pay more money or they would not deliver the content to their subscribers.

That is what net neutrality is about. If you want to decide what content you can see without the interference of your Internet access provider, you are for net neutrality. If you want your Internet access provider to decide what you can see based on how much money they want, you're against net neutrality.

It's that simple. The profits of the company that delivers the content should not determine what content we can access.

Posted by admin at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Thanks to Free Will, we have a letter from Congressman Mike Ferguson putting him on the record regarding same sex marriage. What he doesn't not is that not only did he vote for the amendment to bar gays from marrying each other and raising families, but he is a co-sponsor of the bill.

June 7, 2006

XXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXX
North Plainfield, NJ

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. I appreciate hearing from you and having the benefit of your views.

As you know, the House on September 30, 2004, voted on a proposed amendment to the Constitution that would define marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The House vote, 222-186, fell short of the two-thirds majority required to approve an amendment to the Constitution. I voted for the amendment in the House.

I believe the institution of marriage between a man and a woman is a sacred bond that has been protected for centuries by law, custom and religious belief. It is the foundation of our society and our culture, and marriage between a man and a woman should be protected in law, especially from activist judges who are now attempting to re-define marriage.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your opinions, and please visit my website at www.house.gov/Ferguson for information on other 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 06:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Congressman Mike Ferguson likes to act tough when it comes to homeland security. He's always ready to stand by a firefighter or local Republican politician and announce a grant, but his votes on funding anti-terror activities show a lack of concern for his constituents and the threats we face.

Last year, Ferguson voted for a budget bill that slashed homeland security funding for the states by $700 million, a 30 percent cut in money for first responders and security. Now it turns out that, due to that cut in funding, New Jersey will see significantly fewer homeland security dollars than in the past. According to the Star Ledger, New Jersey

will receive less federal money for anti-terror and disaster preparedness programs this year, as the Bush administration cut the state's overall security funding by $8 million to $51.9 million.

New Jersey was hit hard by the 911 attacks, with 694 Jerseyans losing their lives. Some of the 911 terrorists lived in New Jersey. Two weeks later New Jersey was attacked again when letters containing weaponized anthrax were mailed from Hamilton, NJ to politicians in Washington, D.C. We have some of the largest ports in the nation, a huge international airport.

Yet Mike Ferguson's vote to cut Homeland Security funding cut our security money by almost 16 percent.

It's worse when you consider that while Union and Middlesex County are in the corridor where the majority of New Jersey's funding will go, the towns where it will go will not be in the 7th district. Target ports in Elizabeth, Perth Amboy are out of district, along with sensitive areas like Plainfield and Hillside. Somerset and Hunterdon Counties -- almost half of the district -- will share $18 million with 15 other counties.

In short, Mike Ferguson has voted to slash funding for local homeland security, and the Republican administration has made it even worse by sending money to other states with fewer targets. The result is less money, less security and more evidence that Mike Ferguson is not the right person to represent the 7th district.

Contact Mike Ferguson's office and tell him you want him to stop cutting our homeland security funding, and go back to fighting for the people he's supposed to be representing.

Warren, NJ: (908) 757-7835 (v) or (908) 757-7841 (f) or e-mail
Washington, DC: (202) 225-5361 (v) or (202) 225-9460 (f) or e-mail
Campaign Office: (732) 560-4700 (v) or (732) 560-4790 (f) or e-mail.

Also, please write 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 sites can be found at Dump Mike Letters.

Posted by admin at 07:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

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)

This letter on net neutrality was published in the Courier News on May 4, 2006:

Ferguson trying to put a price on Web

Rep. Mike Ferguson, who sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, voted to pass a bill to the floor which would give wide power to telecommunication companies to change the way we experience the Internet. It gives them the power to charge content providers, like Amazon etc., extra fees to send their content to users.

The Internet will no longer be the free space with equal access for all that it was intended to be. It will be taken over by profit-hungry telecommunication companies and used only by people who can afford to pay to have access to everything.

It should be noted that Rep. Ferguson has received thousands of dollars in campaign donations from AT&T and other telecommunication companies. Until we change to publicly financed elections to diminish the huge influence of lobbyists, the only recourse we have is to barrage our legislators with calls and e-mails opposing this bill.

The Internet is an amazing space which encourages the free flow of ideas and products. Oh! That's right! Republicans and industry lobbyists only like unrestricted commerce as long as they are the ones making money from it.

MARTHA MILLER
Flemington

Posted by admin at 05:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It looks like the media is figuring out who Mike Ferguson is and what kind of representative he's been in Congress. Two articles in the Sunday papers paint him as more beholden to Tom DeLay and the Republican leadership in Congress than to his constituents.

In the Star Ledger's Auditor column (compete text after the fold), they note that he has been a reliable vote to protect Tom DeLay and against tough ethics rules:

Ferguson is usually loyal to the GOP leadership. He was among those who voted to change the House ethics rules to allow DeLay to keep his post as majority leader even after he was indicted on corruption charges.

This week, Ferguson was still singing from the DeLay songbook on that vote.

"It's wrong to allow a district attorney, through a politically motivated indictment, to change the leadership of the House," he said in an interview.

The New York Times, in an article entitled "A Vulnerable Republican," also notes that Ferguson is unwilling to cast off his connections to Tom DeLay:

Democrats have even sought to tie him to the financial scandals on Capital Hill, saying that Mr. Ferguson received more than $54,000 from Mr. DeLay and his political action committees -- a claim the Ferguson camp does not deny. ''Each of those contributions were lawful and appropriate,'' said Chris Jones, Mr. Ferguson's chief of staff.

Of course, regular readers of Dump Mike know that Ferguson has received almost $250,000 from DeLay, Inc. including indicted and convicted current and former staffers.

Continue reading "Mike Ferguson Still Singing To DeLay's Tunes" »

Posted by admin at 06:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The following letter was published in the April 6, 2006 Courier News:

Ferguson does as the Republicans do

In a recent letter, Nancy Singer claims, "Mike Ferguson has been a consistent opponent of opening the Alaska refuge to drilling."

That's simply not true. Congressman Michael Ferguson voted yes to drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and yes to the energy bills in 2001, 2003 and 2005. It's in the Congressional Record.

I don't think any sensible person would call this being consistent against drilling in Alaska. Sounds more like flip-flopping to me.

If you check Ferguson's voting record, you will see he has voted with Bush and the Republican-controlled Congress 90 percent of the time, which has led to the largest federal government ever, including record budget deficits, record national debt and record trade deficits. Ferguson has the same record of failure and incompetence that the Bush administration has.

Perhaps Ms. Singer should check her own facts before lecturing others.

SUSAN RENQUIST
Somerville

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

Congressman Mike Ferguson voted today to block an ethics inquiry into House members who have been implicated in the Jack Abramoff scandal. Though federal prosecutors have linked Abramoff to at least one member of the House in their plea agreement with Abramoff, Ferguson voted with the Republican majority to protect potentially corrup colleagues from being investigated.

The resolution by Nancy Pelosi resolved the following:

RESOLVED, That the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct shall immediately initiate an investigation of the misconduct by Members of Congress and their staff implicated in the scandals associated with Mr. Jack Abramoff's criminal activity.

This is not a radical position to take, but a sensible one if you want to root out corruption in the House of Representatives. However, if you want to protect your own corrupt colleagues a vote to block the inquiry makes perfect sense.

Continue reading "Mike Ferguson Votes To Block Abramoff Inquiry" »

Posted by admin at 02:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

This letter was published in the March 27, 2006 Courier News.

Ferguson's record far from favorable

Nancy Singer, in her recent letter to the Courier News, has accused me of being inaccurate and unfair in my criticism of Congressman Mike Ferguson.

I have very carefully checked not Mike Ferguson's Web site as she suggested, but the Congressional Record, which I believe is impartial.

There, I find that on April 21, 2005, Mike Ferguson voted "Yes" on H.R. 6, which stated in item F that 10 billion barrels of oil could be obtained from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge Coastal Plain Area and in item G that 9.3 billion barrels of oil could be obtained from the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska.

Mr. Ferguson, on June 15, 2004, voted "Yes" on H.R. 4503 to allow building a pipeline through the environmentally sensitive North Slope region of Alaska. This is the same place where 267,000 gallons of oil spilled due to a pipeline break on March 10, 2006. This spill is many times larger than the 38,000-gallon spill caused by the Exxon Valdez.

On April 11, 2003, Mr. Ferguson voted "Yes" on H.R. 6, which, in part, allowed oil drilling in ANWAR. On Nov. 18, 2003, Mr. Ferguson again voted "Yes" on H.R. 6, which again in part allowed oil drilling in ANWAR. On Aug. 2, 2001, Mr. Ferguson voted "Yes" on H.R. 4, which in part allowed oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to expand domestic energy sources.

My conclusion that Mr. Ferguson is not particularly environmentally friendly is supported by noting that in 2005, the American Wilderness Coalition gave him a grade of 33 percent, the Defenders of Wildlife also graded him at 33 percent and the League of Conservation Voters graded him at 17 percent. In 2004, the League of Conservation Voters graded him at 35 percent, and in 2003 it graded him at 30 percent.

Addressing the second area of Ms. Singer's criticism, Mr. Ferguson's tardy response to the Dubai Ports issue: Consulting the timeline as listed by CNN, I note that on Feb. 14, 2006, Charles Schumer notices and the New York Post condemned the acquisition. On Feb. 17, seven U.S. senators, including Hillary Clinton and Robert Menendez, called for a review of the acquisition and introduced legislation to block the sale.

On Feb. 18, Rep. Frank LoBiondo promised legislation requiring port security officials to be U.S. citizens. On Feb. 19, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff defended the deal, and on Feb. 21, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and House Speaker Dennis Hastert called for the administration to stop the deal promising legislation.

Rep. Mike Ferguson, reacting with lightning speed, then said he would support legislation blocking the deal.

LOIS RIGGS
Branchburg

Posted by admin at 07:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Congressman Ferguson's office continues to refuse to answer questions regarding the over the counter sale of Plan B, the emergency contraceptive. Now, instead of answering a different question they are saying they don't comment unless issues come up before the house. From kwilkinson of the site, Blue Jersey:

No position forthcoming. He'll only say something if it comes up in front of the House, which it won't, because it's being held up indefinitely by the FDA politicos, according to Marcus.

This is pretty selective, and intended to avoid answering direct questions from his constituents. It's also based upon a pretty big falsehood. See, contrary to what Marcus said there is a bill in front of the House regarding Plan B and the FDA. Ferguson's people just don't want you to know it.

H. R. 4229 [pdf] is sponsored by Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY14) and has 61 cosponsors. Here's the summary:

To require the Commissioner of Food and Drugs to determine whether to allow the marketing of Plan B as a prescription drug for women 15 years of age or younger and a nonprescription drug for women 16 years of age or older, and for other purposes.

This bill, which goes directly to the question Ferguson's staff refuses to asnwer, was referred on February 17, 2006 to the "Subcommittee on Health" which is part of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Congressman Mike Ferguson sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Congressman Mike Ferguson is the vice chair for the House Subcommittee on Health.

One of two things happened in that call regarding Plan B: either Ferguson's office intentionally lied to a constituent regarding bills and issues pending in front of a committee Ferguson sits on, of Ferguson's office is unaware of the bills and issues pending in front of a committee on which Ferguson is the second in command. They are either lying or incompetent.

So please call his office at (908) 757-7835 (NJ) or (202) 225-5361 (DC) and ask for Abby Bird, the Congressman's official spokeswoman, Marcus who spoke to kwilkinson, or someone else who can answer a question on Ferguson's position on Plan B.

If you get to Ms. Bird or another person capable of answering your questions, please ask them, "Would Congressman Ferguson support a hearing and Subcommittee on Health vote on H.R.4229 to require the FDA to approve Plan B for over-the-counter sales to women 17 years old and older and as a prescription for girls younger than 17?" All we want is a hearing and an up or down vote, because that will put Ferguson on the record.

Please do not be confrontational, but just try to get an answer to the question.

If you do not get a person who will answer the question please visit the online form and ask the question that way.

Contact Blue 7th at info@blue7th.com with the day you asked the question and any answers you get.

Continue reading "All We Want Is An Up or Down Vote on Plan B" »

Posted by admin at 05:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This letter was published in the March 9, 2006 Cranford Chronicle:

To The Chronicle:

On his Web site, Rep. Mike Ferguson says "I believe I have a responsibility to protect our environment." Let's see how Ferguson is fulfilling this important responsibility.

The League of Conservation Voters ( HYPERLINK "http://www.lcv.org" \o "http://www.lcv.org/" www.lcv.org) recently released itsenvironmental scorecard for the first session of the 109th Congress (2005). Scores were based upon 18 House votes, covering issues such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, public lands, air pollution, endangered species, energy policy, CAFTA, water projects, natural gas drilling and facilities, fuel economy, MTBE liability, oil refineries, environmental funding, and environmental justice.

Ferguson's rating is 17 percent. Among New Jersey representatives, only Scott Garrett scored lower. Republican RepresentativesFrank LoBiondo, Jim Saxton, and Chis Smith scored over 70 percent. Democratic Representatives scored 83 to 100 percent.

If I were handing out grades, Ferguson's 17 percent rating would be an "F."Ferguson has failed the environment, he has failed the country, and he has failed New Jersey.In his taxpayer-funded mailings to residents of the 7th District, Ferguson often claims to care about the environment. What happened?

Ferguson has become a sock puppet of the Bush-Cheney-Rove cabal.He is an obedient and loyal lapdog of the White House, and he votes along with Bush policy (and his indicted pal Tom DeLay) about 90 percent of the time.

Ferguson claims to be moderate andindependent.Don't believe it.He is usually just an automatic voteforthe conservative policies of the corrupt and dishonest Republicans who control the federal government.

JOHN CANTILLI
Cranford

Posted by admin at 05:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Update: Welcome Boing Boing visitors! Glad to have ya come by and learn more about Mike Ferguson. If you want to leave a little tip in our tip jar, we would surely appreciate any help in defeating him this November.]

Congressman Mike Ferguson introduced a bill in Congress yesterday which will make it impossible for you to record a radio show and play it back later on your iPod or other music device. The bill essentially forces manufacturers to implement features on satellite, high-definition and regular radios that allow broadcasters to block consumers from recording shows.

Rep. Mike Ferguson, R., N.J., will introduce the �Audio Broadcast Flag Licensing Act of 2006� on Thursday (March 2). The bill includes an HD radio component and a satellite radio component, according to staffers in Ferguson�s office, who spoke to Billboard Radio Monitor on condition of anonymity.

The HD component requires any private company that plans to manufacture an HD radio must incorporate technology in that radio that works with a broadcast audio flag �or something similar.� The satellite component imposes similar audio-flag requirements on equipment manufactured for both XM Satellite Radio and Sirius Satellite Radio.

Back in the 1970s when VCRs were first gaining popularity the film and TV industries screamed and yelled that they would destroy their ability to make money, and movies would suffer. That threat never materialized, and now when you want to record a movie or sporting event to watch at a more convenient time you can.

Ferguson, apparently, doesn't like that idea for radio. He wants to let the Recording Industry Artists Association (RIAA) decide when you will listen to radio shows instead of letting you make that decision for yourself. That's why the RIAA endorsed the bill. They say it is necessary as "technological developments make it easier for consumers to capture and retain digital-quality audio without paying a fee for the content."

But that is just a smokescreen. We have had tape recorders for generations that people could record radio shows on and play them back in their car or on a WalkMan as they exercised. People used to trade Howard Stern tapes and that increased his popularity.

The RIAA wants to restrict your ability to record shows to no more than 30 minutes, and only if you actaully press the buttons to record the individual show. Additionally, they want to forbid you from editing any recordings you make to pick out the parts you want to listen to and avoid the commercials, offensive content and songs or guests you don't like.

The fact is that people who want to profit illegally by recording songs off the radio and selling or file-sharing them somehow can easily do it no matter what technology is put in their way. These people are unscrupulous and willing to violate the law to profit.

But the people like the residents of the 7th district who just want to record Imus in the Morning, Free Beer and Hotwings, Rush Limbaugh, Howard Stern or WPLJ and listen to it at their convenience will not be able to. This is a bill targeted directly at everyday consumers that will have no impact on the criminals who are intentionally breaking the law.

Contact Mike Ferguson's and tell him that stifling technological innovation and consumer freedom is the wrong way to go. Ask him to pull this bill immediately.

You can reach Ferguson at (908) 757-7835 (NJ) or (202) 225-5361 (DC) or write to him on his website. Please be courteous to the folks who answer.

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.

[Learn more about Mike Ferguson's positions on Consumer Issues]

Posted by admin at 07:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

We have long maintained on this site that Congressman Michael Ferguson presents a moderate face to the 7th Congressional District, but that when he goes down to Washington DC he removes the mask and votes as the true right wing conservative he truly is. For a time, he could get away with it and even fool progressive organizations into believing they could work with him.

As a result, early in his tenure Ferguson received endorsements from groups like the League of Conservation Voters (LCV), a non-partisan organization that endorses Democrats and Republicans. In 2001, LCV gave Ferguson an impressive 71 percent rating for his first year in Congress and endorsed his reelection in 2002.

Then things changed, and Ferguson's true voting patten emerged. After starting well, Ferguson finished his first full term with a lowly 59 percent rating. His second term score dropped even farther, slipping to 35 percent over 2003 and 2004 and losing the LCV endorsement.

Today the LCV ratings for 2005 came out and, as predicted last week, his environmental record plummetted to a lowly 17 percent.

This is from a guy who says this on his campaign website:

"If I think our leaders in the House or President Bush are wrong in advocating policies that would weaken our environment, I have and I will continue to stand up for what is right," Congressman Ferguson said. "As the father of three young children, I believe I have a responsibility to protect our environment, preserve open space and ensure our children and grandchildren inherit an environment that is vibrant and strong."

According to the League of Conservation voters, he stopped standing up for what is right years ago.

Posted by admin at 04:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

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)

The Trenton Times' editorial staff slammed Congressman Mike Ferguson's vote for the budget bill that slashed services for senior citizens for the poor while increasing payments to insurers:

Under its provisions, by 2010 13 million low-income people eligible for Medicaid will be faced with significantly higher costs for medical care and prescription drugs because of co-pays that states will be allowed to impose. Many of these folks will forgo the treatment and medicine they need because they will be unable to afford it. Elderly persons in need of nursing-home care will find Medicaid eligibility requirements more stringent. Student financial aid will suffer the biggest cut in history, forcing students and parents to pay higher interest rates for their loans and making college unaffordable for some of them. The Congressional Budget Office says 255,000 fewer children in working families will get child-care help in 2010 than received it in 2004. And hundreds of millions of dollars in child-support payments from deadbeat dads will be lost because of cuts in aid for the enforcement of court orders.

These are some of the cruel consequences of a bill that slashes entitlement spending but extends generous breaks to health insurers whose lobbyists worked with GOP leaders of Congress behind closed doors. One Republican who switched his vote from "yes" to "no," Rep. Jim Gerlach of Montgomery and Berks counties, Pa., said he was "very concerned about how the legislation reduces funding for mental health and education as well as important health-care areas that will ultimately target our nation's most needy citizens."

Five New Jersey Republicans didn't see it that way, and their failure to oppose this bill made the difference: Jim Saxton, R-Mount Holly; Frank LoBiondo, R-Ventnor; Rodney Frelinghuysen, R-Harding; Mike Ferguson, R-Warren, and Scott Garrett, R-Wantage. Some of the five are thought of as "moderate" members of the GOP. There was nothing moderate, or compassionate, about their votes on Wednesday.

Continue reading "Trenton Times Calls Ferguson Vote "Nothing Moderate"" »

Posted by admin at 07:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

The 7th congressional district in New Jersey has a very high average family income, but it is also a district full of working poor, seniors and immigrants. The values we hold, to improve the lives of our families and communities and protect the most vulnerable, are universal. We have a right to expect that our Congressman would not only share them when giving speeches back home, but also when he votes for legislation in Washington.

Yesterday Ferguson voted for a bill a budget bill that included the following reductions in services to the most vulnerable Americans:

• Higher Medicaid premiums for all recipients -- senior citizens, widows and the disabled -- and freezing payment to home health care providers, two changes that will make it harder for senior to afford to stay in their own homes instead of being forced into nursing homes;
• Allow health care providers to deny care to any Medicare recipient who can't afford to pay required cost-sharing, denying poor and indigent seniors needed medical care;
• Increased Medicaid prescription drug co-payments for benefit recipients and reduced payments to pharmacists, moves that the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office says will increase costs for 1.3 million Americans, half of whom live in poverty ;
• Remove seniors from eligibility for Medicare if they had donated significant money to charity in the previous five years;
• Count the equity in a home as wealth for determining if someone is eligible for Medicare, forcing seniors to sell family homes to receive benefits;
• Reduce student loan funding by $12 billion, increasing the interests rates and repayment costs for recent graduates; and
• Federal funds intended to help force deadbeat dads to pay for children they fatheres was cut. That's right, they reduced money to help single moms force the father of their children to pay child support.

These cuts will impact a large portion of the 7th Congressional District. The Census reports that in the 7th Congressional district there are 21,646 people living under the federal poverty rate who are eligible for Medicaid, and 80,6732 senior citizens who are eliigible for Medicare. That means at least 100,000 people in the district will be negatively impacted by these changes. Add in everyone with student loans and the number rises again, since there 24 percent of residents 25 years or older have at least a bachelor's degree.

Continue reading "Does Mike Ferguson Represent Our Values?" »

Posted by admin at 07:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

From the December 20, 2005 Courier News:

GOP lawmakers aid only the wealthy

Congressman Mike Ferguson, along with the other members of his Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives, passed $56 billion in tax breaks last week that would go overwhelmingly to the wealthiest sliver of Americans.

The Tax Policy Center estimates 84.2 percent of the cuts passed by the House would go to the top 20 percent of households by income.

But that's not all. The tax cuts come after this same Republican majority in the House passed $50 billion in cuts to services that struggling working families depend on, like Medicaid, student loans, child support enforcement and food stamps.

These aren't the priorities of America's working families -- and it's time our representatives in Congress knew that they should oppose cuts for working families and new tax breaks for the wealthy.

Where does Congressman Ferguson stand on these issues? Right with his Republican majority.

Working people should keep in mind how little our congressman considers the needs of the people who he purports to represent, by examining his adherence to his parties policies.

BRUNO RIPP
Warren

Posted by admin at 05:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Congressman Rush Holt has sponsored HR 550, the Verified Voting Bill, which will require a paper trail on all electronic voting machines in the future. You can sign an online petition in support of the bill on Congressman Holt's web site.

The Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act (H.R. 550) will:

• Mandate a voter-verified paper ballot for every vote cast in every federal election, nationwide; because the voter verified paper record is the only one verified by the voters themselves, rather than by the machines, it will serve as the vote of record in any case of inconsistency with electronic records;
• Protect the accessibility requirements of the Help America Vote Act for voters with disabilities;
• Require random, unannounced, hand-count audits of actual election results in every state, and in each county, for every Federal election;
• Prohibit the use of undisclosed software and wireless and concealed communications devices and internet connections in voting machines;
• Provide Federal funding to pay for implementation of voter-verified paper balloting; and
• Require full implementation by 2006

The bill has 159 co-sponsors including 8 Republicans. Ferguson has to date refused to co-sponsor this common sense bill that will protect the voters' right to a free and fair election process.

Call on Mike Ferguson to co-sponsor HR 550 today by calling his office at (908) 757-7835 or (202) 225-5361 or write to him on his website. Please be courteous to the folks who answer.

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.

There are others, you know. Blanton and Ashton, Center for NJ Life, Running Scared, Scrutiny Hooligans, Did I say that out loud? Tami, The One True, Patridiot Watch, The Opinion Mill, Xpatriated Texan, Blondesense, A Mockingbird's Medley, and BlueJersey.net.

Posted by admin at 10:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Just like we did last week, it looks like the Courier News noticed that Mike Ferguson was absent from the effort to save Fort Monmouth, as well:

David Rebovich, director of the Rider Institute for New Jersey Politics, predicted that Forrester will try to say Democrats have not been aggressive advocates of the state's needs in Washington and will argue that Corzine has little clout in the nation's capital.

"What the Republicans want to do is suggest that a GOP governor would have better access to the congressional leadership and the White House, and I do think Forrester will try and make some hay in that regard," Rebovich said.

But Rebovich said Republicans pushing Forrester's candidacy have to answer why the state's six GOP congressmen, some with considerable seniority, were not successful in saving Fort Monmouth from the Base Realignment and Closure panel. Three of the GOP congressmen -- Rodney Frelinghuysen, Jim Saxton and Chris Smith -- fought hard for the post.

No Ferguson in that list. Rep. Smith serves Monmouth County, but both Reps. Saxton and Frelinghuysen were working for the good of New Jersey. Rep. Relinghuysen has a district much farther north and farther away from Monmouth than Ferguson.

Where was Mike?

Posted by admin at 10:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

On June 15th, 2005 Mike Ferguson voted to overturn a judge's decision by denying the Justice Department the ability to use tax dollars to enforce the ruling. This is a direct vote against the independence of the judiciary, and its ability to make independent interpretations of the constitution and the law.

It is not the first time this year that Rep. Ferguson has voted to interfere with the judicial process. Earlier this year he voted to impose his beliefs on the Terry Schiavo case.

The case is "Russelburg v. Gibson County" in which members of a local community in Princeton, Indiana filed a federal lawsuit to have a monument of the 10 Commandments removed from a local courthouse. The judge found that the placing of the monument was a violation of the United States Constitution bar on the government establishing a religion and ordered it removed.

People can come out of different sides of this issue, and in fact the courts have over time both allowed and denied religious documents and monuments on government property. That is not the issue here. Mike Ferguson's vote was a direct attempt to bypass the courts and American legal tradition to overturn a legal judicial order by withholding the funds necessary to enforce it.

In fact, the sponsor of the amendment, Representative John N. Hostettler of Indiana, explained the amendment in exactly that way on the House floor [emphasis added]:

Mr. Chairman, here are the facts: federal statute says, ‘Except as otherwise provided by law or Rule of Procedure, the United States Marshals Service shall execute all lawful writs, process, and orders issued under the authority of the United States... .’

“Since this ruling by the Southern District Court in Indiana is not a lawful decision consistent with the Constitution, I will utilize Congress’ Article I, section 8 power of the purse to prevent any funding from being used by the U.S. Marshals Service to remove the Ten Commandments monument."

Rep. Hostettler is playing word games here by saying that this was not a "lawful decision." The judge did nothing illegal in coming to or ordering his decisions and Rep. Hostettler is not saying that he did. That means that the order was lawful according to the rule he quoted, an that Hostettler acknowledges it.

What Rep. Hostettler means when he adds "consistent with the Constitution" is that he believes the decision was wrong, and did not interpret the law properly. The proper place for the merits of the decision to be decided is in a higher court under appeal, and the case is, in fact, currently under appeal by the County. At the highest level, this case could wind up in the Supreme Court where seven of the nine justices were appointed by Republican presidents.

But the proper use of our legal system is not good enough for Rep. Hostettler or Rep. Ferguson. Instead of trusting our federal legal system which has stood for more than 200 years they are trying to overturn judicial decisions not by changing the underlying laws but by changing the federal budget.

Our nation's founders intentionally created a three-part federal government with separate and co-equal powers to prevent any one portion from taking too much power. If this is allowed to pass, the result could be the end of an independent federal judiciary. Congress could overturn any judge's decision it doesn't like simply by forbidding tax money to be spent on the enforcement of that decision.

Representative Ferguson should be careful: this power could be used by conservatives or liberals, depending on which was in control of the Congress. It should not be used by either.

Contact Mike Ferguson on his website or by calling his office at 908-757-7835 and ask him why he voted against allowing the judicial process to continue.

Send the answer you get to dumpmike@gmail.com or post it in the comments below.

Also, write a letter to the editor 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 08:12 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

We've already discussed that Mike Ferguson is the single largest recipient of contributions from embattled House Majority Leader Tom DeLay with a whopping $42,403. And it was recently noted that Congressman Ferguson voted with DeLay 89 percent of the time – including for House rules that weakened ethics requirements to protect DeLay.

But now a look at MIKE PAC, the "Leadership PAC" for Congressman Ferguson, reveals that four of the top five recipients of 2004 contributions from Mike Ferguson were Congressional candidates from Tom DeLay's Texas.

The $27,000 MIKE PAC gave to Texas Congressional candidates was 44 percent of MIKE PAC's total contributions to candidates. No other state saw more than $5,000 in contributions from MIKE PAC, so MIKE PAC gave five times more money to candidates in Tom Delay's Texas than anywhere else.

New Jersey candidates received only $1,000, a single contribution to Bill Spadea on May 11, 2004.

That doesn't mean that ARMPAC donated this much extra money to Congressman Mike Ferguson in order to have it flipped back to candidates in Congress, but it is suspicious.

Here's who got the money (this has been edited to reflect updated information. Original links were from Open Secrets, but we went to the source at the Federal Election Commission for the updated information. Thanks to John C for pointing out the error ):

Randy Neugebauer (R-TX19) is one of only two candidates to receive $10,000 from MIKE PAC. In addition to the $10,000 from Mike PAC, Neugebauer also received $15,000 from ARMPAC, and was running in a safe district as a result of DeLay's redistricting to make it easier for Republicans to win in Texas.

Roger Sessions (R-TX - lost) also received $10,000 from MIKE PAC. Mr. Sessions is a little hard to track down as he appears to have run a pretty light campaign. He raised a total of $43,744, meaning Congressman Ferguson totalled about 23 percent of Mr. Session's total receipts. Mr. Sessions reveived nothing from ARMPAC.

Arlene Wohlgemuth (R-TX) got a $5,000 contribution from Mike, though she lost to Congressman Chet Edwards (D-TX17) who has represented the area for eight terms. She was recruited by DeLay, he raised money for her and he gave her $10,000 from ARMPAC.

Louis Gohmert and Ted Poe each received a $1,000 contribution from MIKE PAC. Gohmert also received $10,000 from ARMPAC, and Poe received $5,000 from ARMPAC.

Why is Mike Ferguson giving so much money – almost half of his money – to Texas Republicans and giving only a measly $1,000 to New Jersey Republicans? Maybe after all the money from Tom DeLay, Mike thinks he really represents Texas.

ADDITIONAL UPDATE: MIKE PAC also received $5,000 from ARMPAC, bringing the total Congressman Ferguson has reveived from Tom DeLay to $47,403. Add in former DeLay staffers, and the number passes $50,000.

EVEN MORE UPDATES: Atrios found that Tom DeLay's TRMPAC just lost a major round in civil court.

Posted by admin at 12:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)