American Conservative Union rates Oroho 95%

Senator Steve Oroho has received a lifetime conservative rating from the American Conservative Union of 95%.  That compares with Senator Mike Doherty's lifetime conservative rating of 96%.  Assemblyman Parker Space has a 94% lifetime rating.  Gail Phoebus was not present for most of the votes and received an "n/a". 

Founded in 1964, the American Conservative Union (ACU) is the nation’s original conservative organization. For more than fifty years, ACU has served as an umbrella organization harnessing the collective strength of conservative organizations fighting for Americans who are concerned with liberty, personal responsibility, traditional values, and strong national defense. As America’s premier conservative voice, ACU is the leading entity in providing conservative positions on issues to Congress, the Executive Branch, State Legislatures, the media, political candidates, and the public.

The American Conservative Union evaluates elected officials based on the following beliefs:

- We believe that the Constitution of the United States is the best political charter yet created by men for governing themselves. It is our belief that the Constitution is designed to guarantee the free exercise of the inherent rights of the individual through strictly limiting the power of government.

- We reaffirm our belief in the Declaration of Independence, and in particular the belief that our inherent rights are endowed by the Creator. We further believe that our liberties can remain secure only if government is so limited that it cannot infringe upon those rights.

- We believe that capitalism is the only economic system of our time that is compatible with political liberty. It has not only brought a higher standard of living to a greater number of people than any other economic system in the history of mankind; more important, it has been a decisive instrument in preserving freedom through maintaining private control of economic power and thus limiting the power of government.

- We believe that collectivism and capitalism are incompatible, and that when government competes with capitalism, it jeopardizes the natural economic growth of our society and the well-being and freedom of the citizenry.

- We believe that it is the responsibility of the individual citizen, whenever his inherent rights are threatened from within or without, to join together with other individuals to protect these rights, or, when they have been temporarily lost, to regain them.

- We believe that any responsible conservative organization must conduct itself within the framework of the Constitution; in pursuance of this belief we refuse to countenance any actions which conflict in any way with the traditions of the American political system.

- The American Conservative Union is created to realize these ends through the cooperation in responsible political action, of all Americans who cherish the principles upon which the Republic was founded.

- The American Conservative Union will welcome all Americans who are prepared to fight for the realization and preservation of these principles through political action at the local, state and national level.

Make solar investigation transparent

Sussex County taxpayers owe at lot to citizen activists like Harvey Roseff.  It was Harvey Roseff who briefed federal and state prosecutors last spring to provide them with valuable information concerning the Sussex solar scam.  Since then, Mr. Roseff has been insistent on transparency and accountability on the part of the Sussex County Freeholder Board  and those charged by the Board with both the oversight of the solar project and the investigation into how those responsible for it failed to live up to the promises they made.

Harvey Roseff enunciated his determination to see the project through by briefly becoming political, albeit in a non-partisan way, when he ran as an Independent for Freeholder last year. Defeated at the polls more by the lack of major party support than by any rejection of the principals he stands for, Mr. Roseff was back at his usual beat of activist and before the Freeholder Board, pestering them for answers.  He was there again Wednesday night, and was driven to distraction by the County Attorney's presentation of the oversight of the solar project.  The level of detail is a matter for serious concern, according to a source close to Mr. Roseff.

While some freeholders appear content to answer questions off-the-cuff, with speculative statements, and others claim that all the information the public needs to know is "on-line" somewhere, Watchdog strongly agrees with citizen activists like Harvey Roseff and John Snyder who want to hold an open public forum at which those responsible for the solar debacle could be asked the questions that the public -- the taxpayers -- want answered.  And while we understand that not everyone responsible will attend, certainly those still in the employment of the taxpayers of Sussex County should be expected to attend. 

Some politicians claim that such an open hearing would be difficult to organize and carry out.  We are certain that the New Jersey Herald could be relied upon to organize such an event, and that the Herald's attorney could maintain the flow of questions and answers.  Instead of pointing to documents "on-line" or off-the-cuff speculations, freeholders could assemble those documents, boil them down to some key points, present them to the public, and then turn the entire package over to the people for review and clarification.

From this it is hoped that we will finally have an answer to this key and  fundamental question posed over and over by Harvey Roseff:  "Why did Sussex County bail out SunLight (the private corporation behind the solar project), when the County won all the court cases up to the Supreme Court?"

It is clear that we need SunLight in the room to answer this question.  Let's make that happen.

The one reform that would change everything

Ever wonder why a county official who claims to love his county turns around and votes in a way that harms it?  Ever wonder why an anti-tax Republican suddenly supports a Democrat tax-hike?  Ever wonder why some politicians appear to vacillate between competing interests? 

Usually, it comes down to money.

Sometimes you can follow the money.  In some cases, you can actually match up the change in an elected official's voting pattern with the change in who funds his or her campaign.  And when you do, it is more than a little shocking.  The drip, drip, dripping away of principled support for, or opposition to, some policy is replaced by the growing financial support from this interest group or that.

Sometimes the change appears sudden and radical, like when Senate President Steve Sweeney flip-flopped on the death penalty, same-sex marriage, and the Second Amendment.  But take a long look at the cumulative effect of those contributions and you will see that drip, drip, dripping away of moral resolve.  The train might take a long time to reach the station and you might not know it has until the whistle blows, but when it arrives it is jam-packed with hot, sweaty, money.

Often, too often, you can't follow the money.  Because in New Jersey, while an elected official must report his or her source of income -- like High Street Consulting for example -- the state does not require elected officials to report the "clients" of High Street Consulting.  If we knew who the clients of High Street Consulting were, we would know more about why the elected official who owns it behaves the way he does.  Under the current reporting requirements, an elected official with a firm like High Street Consulting could take money from a questionable source, something that would place him or her in a conflict of interest, and nobody would be the wiser.

Reforming this would shed light on the political alliances that tug an elected official this way or that.

Washington State has such a law.  For every business interest held, the state's Public Disclosure Commission requires public officials to list each corporation, partnership, joint venture, sole proprietorship, union, association, business or other commercial entity and each government agency that paid compensation to the entity.  It also requires what property, goods, services or other consideration was given or performed for the compensation.

This is real disclosure and it is desperately needed everywhere in New Jersey, but especially in the interdependent, incestuous political community of Sussex County.