Hoboken Reporter, October 31, 2004

Dear Editor:

Over the weekend, several career politicians expressed their perceptions (coupled with anger and indignation) about the inferences they saw in the People for Open Government's (POG) ad in last week's Reporter, an ad that supported the referendum on pay to play that is on the November 2 ballot. They objected to POG's presentation of their positions in the Hoboken Democratic Organization in the same ad (and in handouts) with the names of their major contributors and the amounts of no-bid contracts that were subsequently granted. The extent of their anger seems to have come from a perception that POG was connecting the dots between contributions, the letting of no-bid contracts to the donors, and politicians. In doing that, these politicians have put their fingers on exactly what is wrong with Pay-to-Play, something the general public has perceived for a long time.

Even newspapers (Star Ledger) and politicians themselves (Senator Corzine, Governor McGreevey among many others) have spoken out about the dangers inherent in this system that gives the impression of overt bribery for lucrative contracts. In politics, impressions and perceptions can spell the difference between election or rejection. It is only fair, nonetheless, to note that our present-day politicians did not create this system, they inherited it. For decades every Hoboken administration has used it as the easiest way to solicit big money. It is rampant throughout the State of New Jersey. That is no excuse, however, for perpetuating the system. There is no excuse for a majority of the City Council to reject the ordinance supported by 1,000 voter petitions or to attempt to place its own weakened version of anti pay-to-play on the ballot (thrown out by the courts) followed by the two-machine controversy (now only one machine and one question on the ballot). The attempts to undermine this critical ordinance banning pay to play displays a contempt for the intelligence of the citizens of this city and a desire to keep the easy money flowing. After all of the defeats to their efforts to confuse the electorate and cripple the peoples' ordinance, a unanimous council finally agreed to support it.

People for Open Government doesn't claim that illegal activity has occurred other than that which has been well reported in the newspapers. I do not claim that verifiable "corruption" has occurred, just that pay-to-play is an all-too-easy road to that condition. We have seen enough politicians (and their contributors) admit to bribery and submit to prison sentences. Politicians, the people who are most at risk under pay to play, rather than displaying indignation and fighting the ordinance on the ballot, should support it as a means of proving their integrity and willingness to hear the voice of the people. Let your voice be heard on November 2. Vote 'Yes' for Public Contracting Reform (the anti pay to play ordinance), the way to good government.

Helen Manogue
Hoboken