Passaic County Freeholder Debates

On 2 consecutive evenings this week, I attended debates between candidates for the Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders. The first, held in Wayne and sponsored by the League of Women Voters, as well as the second, held at Passaic County Community College in Paterson and sponsored by the Herald News and the Record, pitted the Democrat incumbents James Gallagher, Sonia Rosado, and Tahesha Way against the Republican challengers Arthur Soto, Keith LaForgia, and Erik Lowe.

Here is what the Herald News had to say, and you can scroll down for audio files (mp3) of each debate.

Predictably, my coverage will be more detailed and will definitely hit harder. I will first go candidate by candidate and give my impressions on each individual. Then, I will highlight some of the juicier exchanges of the evening. Finally, some general observations and a summary of the campaign.

James Gallagher:

Without a doubt, Gallagher, who is aiming for his 4th term and has served as a Freeholder since 1997, possesses the strongest and most comprehensive knowledge of County government than any of the other 5 candidates. His grasp of the budget and the various departments shone through very clearly in the debates, particularly when asked specific areas that he would seek to cut. His answer to this question was the most specific, the most substantial, and the most confident.

However, Gallagher seems exhausted. I cannot help but think that in his heart of hearts, he would prefer to lose on November 7 and no longer serve as a Freeholder. He just does not demonstrate the passion to do the job, unlike his 3 opponents and his running mate Tahesha Way. Even when making his personal appeal during the debates, Gallagher fumbled through a poignant and otherwise effective biographical story about growing up poor, excusing himself for repeating it during past campaigns. Overall, Gallagher does not seem "happy" to be a Freeholder.

This discontent manifests itself in Gallagher's go-along-get-along manner of governance. Despite his claims, I find it hard to accept that, after seeing 9 budgets come and go Gallagher actually believes that the current Passaic County budget is "austere". I do not know what is driving this denial – perhaps a desire to avoid party infighting that always accompanies one-party rule, or perhaps something else.

Gallagher clearly has the experience and knowledge, but has been all too willing to accept a detrimental and intolerable status quo.

Sonia Rosado:

If I had to describe Sonia Rosado in one word, "arrogant" would certainly be among my top choices. As I mentioned in a previous post, her condescending attitude toward taxpayers is appalling. She refuses to accept that mistakes have been made during the past 6 years, leading to the current budget crisis, and repeatedly attempts to blame tax increases on previous Boards as far back as 25 years ago. Let's get real. The voters are simply not that stupid.

As an example, when questioned directly by Erik Lowe about the 2005 County Audit Report, Rosado didn't seem to know what it was or whether it had been filed. She excused herself by saying, "We don't have all the County finances here." When Lowe rightfully retorted, "You’re a Freeholder!" Rosado replied, "So?" Arrogance, plain and simple.

Rosado's closing pitch on both nights seemed to be: Vote for me and the other Democrats, because none of us have gone to jail. Congratulations. But that is of little comfort to the senior citizens who wear winter jackets indoors because they can’t afford to heat their homes, since Rosado and her Democrat colleagues have raised county taxes 65% in the past 6 years.

Tahesha Way:

Ms. Way, with degrees from Brown and UVA, is the best-educated office holder in Passaic County, and one of the best-educated office holders in this state, period. She has an outstanding profile and makes a very good presentation. She demonstrates passion for the job, and has clearly embraced her role as Freeholder, which manifested in a few very effective anecdotes that she related during her debate answers.

Way strongly asserted on numerous occasions that she is the sole Wayne resident on the Board, and that she is a mother of 3 children. These were both good ways of communicating with suburban voters in particular. She also touted her working class roots. I do believe that Way could be an exemplary role model, particularly to the many aspiring young black women of Passaic County – not because she is married to a sports star, but because her own abilities have enabled her to be a successful career mother.

However, I feel that Way is serving far below her potential. While I understand as well as anyone the difficulty of being, politically speaking, the "new kid on the block", I think that Way has demonstrated far too little independence from her other 6 Democrat colleagues and far too much readiness to endorse their harmful status quo. Furthermore, some of Way's debate answers and assertions, especially regarding the Sheriff's Department and the County Audit Report, suggest that she is far too trusting of the Democrat machine. I would like to see an elected official of Way’s intellectual capacity question some of the Democrats' untouchable assumptions and demand accountability within her own Party. She is too talented to be just another Passaic County Democrat Kool-Aid drinker.

Arthur Soto:

Art, the brother of Passaic Councilman Jonathan Soto, also lives in Passaic with his wife and 2 children. As a technology professional at Horizon BCBS, he brings an impressive analytical approach to his campaign and has clearly done his homework and studied the budget. Accordingly, one of the highlights of the 2 evenings was Soto's rebuttal to Gallagher's proposal to cut the Economic Development department in order to save money. Soto slammed his opponent when he pointed out that the said department had only 2 employees, out of a total of 2,500. This was picked up and quoted in the newspaper article about the debate – a very astute move on Soto's part.

Even when Soto chooses to ridicule another individual, he does so politely. This "son of a preacher-man" is no doubt the "good cop" of the 3 Republican candidates. He is quite articulate and makes a very professional appearance behind the microphone. His presentation style is smooth, like that of Gallagher; he is sure and steady and speaks with confidence. Soto is a minister himself and it is quite obvious when talking to the man that he is firmly guided by principle. He is honest and conscientious. He condemned pay-to-play in stronger terms than anyone else in the debate, and even used one of my favorite phrases – "legalized bribery" – to describe it. That moral fortitude, coupled with his analytical approach, would make him a strong asset to Passaic County taxpayers.

Erik Lowe:

Lowe is one feisty character. He is definitely a pleasure to watch in action, and adds some entertaining color to the debates. He is the most willing to mix it up and pick fights with his opponents. As mentioned earlier, he had no hesitation to turn to Sonia Rosado and cede his time to have her blunder her way through a question about the non-existent 2005 County Audit Report. By contrast, that is not Soto's style. So Lowe plays the role of "bad cop", and with a delightful urban flair. At several points I had to bury my face in my lap because I was laughing out loud hearing Lowe yell, "It's RIDICULOUS!" when describing the tax situation facing Passaic County.

Lowe speaks passionately about the city of Paterson, where he lives, and advocates for low-income families. His experience with budgets and risk as a bank manager would also provide a valuable set of skills to the Board. I must add that this is a key strength of the Republican ticket this year. All 3 candidates – Soto, Lowe, and LaForgia – have private sector experience, and are not living off the taxpayers.

Former Republican Elease Evans, who also hails from Paterson's black community, clearly has issues with Lowe. For some reason, he gets under her skin something fierce – in fact, she heckled him from the audience on both evenings. He handled it beautifully. The first night, he paused and said with a stern and confident look, "May I finish?" and the second night he came out firing and attacked one very controversial topic – former County Clerk Ronni Nochimson's job (see the transcript further down the page).

Keith LaForgia:

In my first blog post about Keith LaForgia, I mentioned a discussion I had with a Clifton politico. We discussed LaForgia's desire to enter the Freeholder race, and I asked this individual what his impressions were. His response: "If I was going to war, I'd definitely want Keith in my foxhole."

Well, if LaForgia's no-nonsense, don't-mess-with-me debating style is any indication, that Clifton politico nailed it right on the head. I too would definitely want Keith in my foxhole, because he knows what he believes and will fight to defend it. He doesn't apologize for his convictions, and will not be shy to rebuke anyone who dares to question his principles. If Soto is the "good cop" and Lowe the "bad cop" of the Republican candidates, that definitely makes LaForgia the "enforcer".

He demonstrated two striking examples of this vigor in the debates. During the first night, when a very hot question about the Sheriff's Department was posed, LaForgia did what very few Passaic County politicos have ever done: he directly and publicly confronted the Sheriff (who had criticized LaForgia in a recent newspaper article) and said in no uncertain terms that the Sheriff's budget had to be cut.

Secondly, LaForgia (who has served as a Clifton School Board member since 2004) used his opening statement in the second debate to assail Tahesha Way's suggestion from the previous evening that his mere endorsement of a Clifton School Budget referendum equated to a vote to increase taxes. His clever quip, "I'd like to see the county budget increase of 12.36 percent this year go before the voters of this county" scored a hit in the newspaper article as well.

LaForgia is not the most eloquent of the individuals running for Freeholder this year. He doesn't have to be. Though his presentation style is a bit rougher around the edges, he finds no problem delivering a compelling message. LaForgia successfully drove home several key points, the first being his experience in the private sector, specifically in the construction industry. He pointed out that he has had the opportunity to manage multi-million dollar projects in a corporate setting, where budgets matter and you get fired if you don't perform. Coming from a similar background, I personally have tremendous confidence in LaForgia's ability to contribute his extensive project management skills to the benefit of Passaic County residents. I have no doubt that he will attack the budget and cut the fat.

Here is the link to the mp3 file of the Wayne debate.

Indexing for Wayne:

0:00 – Opening statements
3:10 – County roads
6:00 – Pay to play
11:15 – the ESS AYCH EE ARE EYE EFF EFF rumble (note the conspicuous throat-clearing)
17:50 – Taxes, taxes, taxes (excuses, excuses, excuses)
24:15 – Homeland Security
26:00 – Courthouse disrepair
31:55 – "Will you vote for a tax increase?"
38:00 – PCUA debt (yawn)
45:55 – Closing statements (Republicans are convicted felons)

Here are excerpts of the best bit, regarding the Sheriff's Department:

LOWE: I'll take this one. There has been a lot of – I'm gonna call it what it is – CRAP that has been said that we have said about the Sheriff's Department. I'd like to know where it came from. It came from, first of all, a PR person who is no longer employed by this organization – the Passaic County Regular Republican Organization. The Sheriff's office has done a great job, and they're getting better at what they do. What I think should happen, more closely in my city and other urban cities is that the Sheriff's officers should work closely with local law enforcement to help curb drug activity, prostitution, and crime. Now don't get me wrong – and I'll say it again – the Sheriff's office is doing a great job doing that but everybody know that a lot more can be done EVERYWHERE.

LAFORGIA: I have been personally attacked by our Sheriff for something that he said that I had said about his department. I've never once mentioned Sheriff Speziale in any of my comments, but I'm gonna mention him now. I believe in strong Homeland Security. I believe in strong Law Enforcement. I also believe in an economically sound way of doing it. There's a lot of fluff in every department in this County, including the Sheriff's Department. There needs to be accountability in every Department in this County, including the Sheriff's Department. I have never once attacked the man, he sends me an email attacking me. I look forward to, when I am elected, sitting down with Sheriff Speziale to work out these issues.

WAY: For anyone to ever challenge or say something negative about the Sheriff's Department is entirely wrong. (yes, this is an exact quote, listen at 15:38)

Here is the link to the mp3 file of the Paterson debate.

Indexing for PCCC:

0:00 – Opening statements
7:10 – What is a Freeholder?
13:15 – How can a double-digit tax increase be avoided next year?
20:05 – What are some of the untapped revenue sources in the County?
26:10 – Sheriff's budget
33:10 – What would you cut?
39:25 – How can you minimize patronage?
45:45 – Should the jail be renovated, left alone, or rebuilt?
52:05 – How can County facilities be maintained?
57:50 – Open Space Fund
1:02:55 – Should the County be in the Health Care business?
1:08:50 – What is your personal strength?
1:15:05 – Closing statements

Here are excerpts of the best bit, Erik Lowe responding to heckling from Elease Evans during his closing statement:

LOWE: As I said earlier, the majority of the budget is salary. In the 2003 and 2004 Audit Reports there are salaries there that cannot be justified. Positions have been created to favor friends.

EVANS (from the audience): That's not true.

LOWE: It's not true?! Let's look at Ronni Nochimson's position. It was created. And she has a county car. THAT'S TRUE. That's true. We have to stop with the rhetoric. Last night, Freeholder Gallagher said that the 2005 Audit Report was in Trenton. I hold a letter here, right now, from Keith Kazmark, that it has not been adopted by the Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders, and that Audit Report is not in Trenton. We've got to CUT THAT OUT.

In general, I enjoyed the debates. They were entirely issue based and devoid of personal attacks, unlike the childish and disgusting US Senate debates that we have had the agony of watching.

On the whole, the Republican Freeholder candidates made a stronger case, and demonstrated a firm grasp of the numbers to drive home the message about high taxes. The Democrats, by and large, responded merely with lame excuses about the PCUA and other Thriller-era sins. But still, I don't think the Republican candidates went far enough. It's one thing to point out the patronage jobs, but they seemed gun-shy to reach the obvious conclusion that some people are going to have to lose their jobs in order to cut taxes. I would also have liked to have seen more specific ideas for cuts, even if not definitive.

But the Republicans, led by Keith LaForgia, fired a shot across the bow of Sheriff Jerry Speziale, who is on the ballot next year. I think at this point it is clear that his budget will no longer be beyond reproach. The further we get from September 11, 2001, the degree of scrutiny to which Homeland Security related spending will be subjected will only increase, and Speziale needs to prepare for that.

I also found that the Republican debate strategy was far more effective than any of the campaigns I have witnessed since 2003. Instead of focusing on who stole spoons from the County kitchen, or some other insignificant Grand Street gossip, the 3 candidates hammered the numbers: 12.4% tax increase this year, 65% since 2000, 350 new jobs (one per week), etc.

It was a pleasure to see Walter Porter turn up for the debate in Paterson. He sat beside Chairman Scott Rumana and their quips had me laughing throughout the debate. "What are they, golden beds?" – regarding the over-budget improvements to the Preakness HealthCare Center. Porter looked happy and healthy and I was pleased to see him supporting the ticket.

All in all, the debate received relatively little coverage (the newspaper article was not lengthy), so the fundraising advantage enjoyed by the Democrats will enable them to deliver their message with more frequency as we approach Election Day. The newspaper endorsements also remain to be made – at a minimum, we should expect a split endorsement. Good luck to all the candidates.
continue reading "Passaic County Freeholder Debates..."

Libertarian Lou

Last night was déjà vu for me. I had the pleasure of attending the debate for the NJ 8th District Congressional seat, which pitted the incumbent Congressman, Democrat Bill Pascrell against the challenger, Libertarian Lou Jasikoff.

Two years ago, it was I who sat behind the microphone, as the Republican challenger to Pascrell. I am very disappointed to report that my counterpart, José Sandoval, who is on the ballot as the GOP candidate this year, did not attend this debate (or any of the previous ones), and did not submit a written statement either. I cannot for the life of me ascertain why. As a rule, a challenger will take any and EVERY opportunity to square off and embarrass the incumbent, especially when the record is replete with contradictions, as is most certainly the case with Pascrell.

(note: I cannot link to Pascrell's campaign website, as I did with Sandoval and Jasikoff, as Pascrell does not have one. In fact, last night during the debate he actually bragged about not needing one, and suggested that his congressional website run by the government was sufficient. To me this yet another example of this man's sense of entitlement - he does not seem to see the need to inform voters of why he believes he deserves another term in DC. I would not be surprised if Pascrell were the only one of 435 incumbents who does not use the internet in campaigning.)

But anyway, after the debate, I had the pleasure of speaking at length with Lou Jasikoff - a lifelong Republican who favors Libertarian ideology (like myself). Like many Libertarians that I have met, he possesses strong intellectual capacity and has a solid understanding of American history, as well as the Constitution. Jasikoff is more akin to the "practical" breed of Libertarians, unlike the slash and burn style demonstrated by Austin Lett, who ran against Rodney Frelinghuysen 2 years apparently moved to Utah to run again this year.

I urge everyone to take a look at Lou's campaign website. Here are some key quotes to give you an idea of what he is all about:

"My position has been the same for years, that as a nation we cannot continue to be the world's police force...Everyone of our politicians need to be held accountable for their vote and stop hiding behind the notion they were mislead."

"Both parties are now bought and sold by the special interest groups they now represent. For my part, this campaign will accept no contributions from anyone over $199.00. We will not be influenced by any individual, group, corporation or party. Foolish perhaps, but better to get our message out by taking it to the people than selling one's soul and ideas for a few dollars."

"We cannot have open borders, where illegal immigrants work at low wages for companies that are not paying the same taxes as those who are playing by the rules. It is an unfair disadvantage for legitimate companies, and at the same time drive the wages down for the American worker."

Check back tomorrow for hard-hitting coverage of the 2 Passaic County Freeholder debates.
continue reading "Libertarian Lou..."

A New Path to Peace: The Damascus Road

Chronicles magazine has published my recent article concerning US-Syria relations in its October, 2006 issue. For those unfamiliar with Chronicles, the magazine enjoys popularity with traditional American conservatives, sometimes called "paleoconservatives" to distinguish them from their arch-foes: the disaffected liberals commonly known as "neoconservatives".
--------------------------------------

A New Path to Peace - The Damascus Road
by George Ajjan

Israel's recent siege of Lebanon, which has imposed a crippling humanitarian, economic, and psychological setback on her northern neighbor, may return Syria to the center stage of Middle Eastern politics. Considering Syria's enduring influence over Lebanon and the Palestinians and her close ties to Iran, ignoring Syria no longer serves America's (or Israel's) interests.

Even before the recent escalation of hostilities in the region, President George W. Bush's advisors, mindful of his legacy, should have calculated the value of engaging Syria, given the realignment of Syrian and Palestinian objectives that resulted from Hamas's recent electoral victory and Syria's continued ability to loom large over Lebanese politics despite a hasty military withdrawal following the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri.

When Lebanon held elections shortly after Hariri's death, Hezbollah demonstrated its formidable political power by scoring more seats in the Lebanese parliament and the Beirut cabinet than ever before — an obvious windfall for Syria. In addition, Maronite politician Michel Aoun, enormously popular among Lebanon's sizable Christian minority, behaved capriciously. As Syria's fiercest opponent when he headed Lebanon’s army, Aoun had even declared war on Damascus toward the end of the Lebanese civil war. As Lebanon's first post-occupation elections approached, however, Aoun left Syria off the table and reserved his ire for Hariri's allies. Consequently, his "Omega" coalition, which triumphed in Lebanon's most Christian region, actually included pro-Syria parties. Once the new parliament convened, Aoun entered into a political alliance with Hezbollah — another boon for Syria. (continued...)

That Hezbollah did not fail to influence the Lebanese elections is no surprise. In the weeks leading up to the elections, American policymakers overestimated the influence of the anti-Syria camp, especially MP Saad Hariri, the politically inept son of the slain Rafik who, fearing his father's fate, remained outside of the country.

Hamas's January electoral victory in Palestine significantly reshaped Palestinian-Syrian relations, which should also have led President Bush to reconsider rapprochement with Damascus. Syria's rapport with the new Hamas majority was a departure from the status quo, since, in previous years, Syrian and Palestinian leaders have been at odds. The Syrian government, led for decades by the micromanaging Ba'athist dictator Hafez Assad, had consistently horrible relations with Yasser Arafat's Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). These grudges most aggressively manifested as an ugly sideshow during the Lebanese civil war, but Assad's retaliation continued in the 1990s through his support of the "rejectionist" Palestinian groups based in Damascus, Islamic Jihad and Hamas. These rivals of Arafat undermined the PLO's peacemaking credibility by launching suicide bombings at inopportune times, which also served to remind the United States that she could not ignore Syria's stake in the peace process. For a similar purpose, Syria steadfastly supported Hezbollah's activities, serving as a logistical conduit for the transfer of Iranian weaponry to strongholds in southern and eastern Lebanon, enabling Hezbollah to claim victory for Israel's withdrawal in 2000.

When Hafez Assad died that same year, his mantle passed to his 34-year-old son, Bashar, who proceeded with similar affinity for Hezbollah and hostility toward the PLO. For example, during the 2002 Arab Summit in Beirut, Assad's trusty disciple Emile Lahoud, the loyal-to-a-fault Lebanese president, obnoxiously prohibited Arafat from addressing the conference via satellite from his Israeli-mandated confinement in Ramallah.

Early in his first term, President Bush attempted to cooperate with Syria — not to pursue the peace process, but to drive Iraq further into isolation. He also overlooked Syria's increasingly unnecessary military presence in Lebanon and tolerated her support of Hezbollah, even allowing Secretary of State Colin Powell to snub the Lebanese opposition guru, Maro­nite Patriarch Nasrallah Sfeir, when he visited Washington in March 2001.

After September 11, however, circumstances changed dramatically, and President Bush found himself increasingly surrounded by policymakers who saw evil in all things Ba'ath. Syria became a poster child for terrorism, especially in the rhetoric of the President's neoconservative advisors. Assad's strident opposition to the Iraq war and hostile practice of facilitating the insurgency — with Syria serving as a transit point — plunged U.S.-Syria relations deeper into disarray; in 2003, Congress passed the Syria Accountability and Lebanon Sovereignty Act, which included economic sanctions.

The relationship did not hit bottom, however, until the assassination of Hariri on February 14, 2005, for which Washington quickly blamed the Syrian regime. Margaret Sco­bey, the U.S. ambassador to Syria, was officially recalled and has never returned to Damascus. The list of Syrian crimes now included murdering Hariri and his entourage, abetting the Iraq insurgency, hosting the "rejectionist" Palestinian groups, and supporting Hezbollah.

The first issue was the freshest, most dramatic, and easiest to sell diplomatically, and it even afforded President Bush and French President Jacques Chirac the opportunity to kiss and make up — at Syria's expense. The second issue mattered the most to the American public, with the dubious claim that "Saddam's WMDs were moved to Syria" still ringing in their ears. But the Hamas/Hezbollah factor became an ideological sticking point for the administration, increasing its already ardent desire to humiliate the Syrian regime.

Assad, in turn, played the antagonist par excellence. In addition to strengthening ties to Iran, he capped off his defiance with a September 10, 2005, televised press conference during which he flaunted his close ties to Hamas politburo chief Khaled Meshaal and other Damascus-based detractors. At a time when Washington was rolling out the red carpet for PLO leader Abu Mazen, the Syrian regime seemed determined to undermine those efforts, much to the fury of White House officials.

In retrospect, the Bush administration's actions suggested neither a valid assessment of Arab public opinion nor the establishment of robust contingency plans for the pending Palestinian election. Instead, Bush continued to pout, the Palestinians voted, and White House protégé Abu Mazen lost his legitimacy almost overnight, to the benefit of Hamas. Basically, Bashar Assad completely outmaneuvered Bush. For all the juvenile blunders he and his obtuse cronies committed in Lebanon, Assad, strategically speaking, more than compensated by reading Meshaal's coffee cup like a seasoned pro.

The Hamas victory truly broke new ground, because the Syrian and Palestinian regimes represent separate tracks of the peace process with a far more cohesive agenda than at any time in recent memory. President Bush needs to accept this new reality and acknowledge Syria's significant influence over both Lebanon and Palestine. Despite the lack of any connection to Hamas, and the scant hope of establishing one organically, America already has a relationship with Syria, strained though it may be. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice grudgingly admitted as much during a recent trip to the region.

There is also a track record of nearly completed peace negotiations between Israel and Syria that could be resurrected in order to make a deal that saves face for everyone involved. However, President Bush — and whatever discredited neoconservatives he still enlists — may be unable to take that ideological step. They hate the Syrian regime with a passion, and they unjustly project this bias onto the Syrian people, falsely assuming that Bashar Assad is weak and unpopular. Consequently, the Bush administration does not wish to legitimize the Syrian regime by engaging it in negotiations. This irrational fixation is ultimately detrimental to U.S. interests, because, diplomatically speaking, Syria is the only reliable access point to both Hezbollah and Hamas.

To reignite the peace process, the United States could discourage Israel's unilateral disengagement policy, favored by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, and pursue the Palestinian, Syrian, and Lebanese tracks together. Assad could be offered concessions in exchange for helping tame the behavior of Hamas and brokering an arrangement in Lebanon whereby Hezbollah would have to disarm. If the Syrians furnished Meshaal and other protégés with a crash course in peaceful diplomacy, thereby achieving a more moderate positioning from Hamas, and successfully facilitated Hezbollah's disarmament — and Israel responded positively — President Bush might succeed in hammering out a comprehensive deal before leaving office. That deal would include a fully sovereign Palestinian state as well as a Lebanese political solution, which would update the 1989 Taif Accords and likely offer the Shiites — Lebanon's largest sect — an expanded role to compensate for Hezbollah's disarmament. A reasonable timetable would run well into the first term of President Bush's successor, however, which would make it difficult for him to establish the peace deal as part of his legacy.

The alternative is an intensely risky and divisive strategy, but, given the current state of unrest in the region, the timing is right for Bush to implement it. In this scenario, the United States would cut Hezbollah's supply lines and weaken Hamas by isolating it from Syria. Such a tactic would simplify the Palestinian equation, assuming that Israel would continue with a unilateral disengagement policy in the West Bank, while the United States would shepherd the less cumbersome, more easily implemented Syrian and Lebanese tracks. Presumably, Syria would be lavishly rewarded, most likely with the entire Golan Heights, in exchange for delivering on a lengthy list of tough concessions, which would include facilitating Hezbollah's disarmament. Syria would have to cease all support for Hamas and the other "rejectionist" Palestinian groups, who would be permanently expelled from Syria back to the West Bank and thereby deprived of their impunity and subject to retaliation by Israel. Syria would have to recognize the state of Israel and normalize ties, including full diplomatic exchange. She would have to minimize her ties with Iran and express her disapproval of Iran's nuclear ambitions. She would have to cooperate with American goals in Iraq, including, but not limited to, border control. She would have to grant full citizenship to some 420,000 Palestinian refugees currently living in Syria. She would have to compensate Syrian Jewish families who lost homes, businesses, or lands during reprisals following the 1948, 1967, and 1973 wars. And she would have to acknowledge Lebanon's sovereignty and establish an embassy in Beirut.

We can only speculate about the disposition of the Israeli public toward such a proposal. Their wartime psyche might reject the concept out of frustration and mistrust of Arabs in general. Alternatively, the tenacity of Hezbollah fighters and their consequent emboldening impact on provocative, militant elements in the Islamic world might convince Israelis that a conclusive "land for peace" deal is in their long-term interest. While the Israeli military can inflict major damage on Lebanon and certainly wage similar air strikes on Syria with relative impunity, its leaders know that this strategy is not sustainable. Unless Israel occupies every square inch of land from which missiles could be launched, the possibility remains for isolated rocket barrages to send tens of thousands of her citizens into bomb shelters.

Only one force has demonstrated the capability to stop such activities: the military and intelligence services of the countries from which these attacks could be launched. The only way that Israel will be safe in the long term is for these tightly controlled Arab state institutions to deal with internal rogue elements themselves. Essentially, Israelis need the infamous Syrian moukhabarat to work to disrupt terrorists instead of facilitating them. They would have to conclude that this outsourcing of crackdowns against militants, which has already been done with Egypt and Jordan, would ultimately increase Israel's security. Of course, the price for the Syrian and Lebanese governments to switch sides and comply would be "land for peace" treaties that allow those governments to recover some of their dignity.

The Syrian regime, however, might not be willing or even able to make so many concessions. Backpedaling on resistance to Israel, including cutting support to Hamas and Hezbollah, could prove insurmountable. And, if such a peace deal were successfully brokered, Syria would no longer have an ominous external threat as her main focus and would have to shift her attention to internal economic issues, especially tackling corruption, which Assad has not yet shown sufficient motivation to confront. Furthermore, the Ba'ath Party would find little justification for maintaining the draconian Emergency Laws that have curtailed political activity since 1963, or for continuing Syria’s constitutional mandate of an essentially one-party system.

This plan would test the political savvy of Bashar Assad. To explain to the Syrian people that he has eschewed Ba'athist rhetoric about a comprehensive solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict would certainly damage his cherished reputation as a staunch defender of Arabism.

Still, it is difficult to overstate the importance of the Syrian Arab Republic regaining its territory in full. Assad's presumed ability to restore Syria's sense of national dignity would enshrine him, and his father by extension, as Arab heroes on par with few others, assuring goodwill from the Syrian people for years to come. He will also have validated secular nationalism and dealt a crushing blow to his only credible opponents, the Muslim Brotherhood, having completely stolen their thunder. When free elections would finally be held, what argument could the radical Muslims possibly make to suggest their superior ability to rule Syria when their rivals, the secular incumbents, have delivered such a striking victory?

Certainly, the defeat of Syrian Islamists would forcefully curtail a worrisome regional trend. But America would reap other vital rewards from an Israel-Syria peace deal. Most importantly, agreement on the concept of "land for peace" on Israel's northern borders with Syria and Lebanon would be accompanied by Hezbollah's disarmament, thereby ending its role as an Iranian military proxy. If President Bush could steer this deal to completion and offer a sufficiently attractive package to pry Syria away from Iran, he would deliver a tremendous blow to Tehran's imperial ambitions by essentially depriving Iran of valuable allies in Syria and Lebanon.

Responding to such a proposal would no doubt be the biggest and toughest decision Bashar Assad has faced. He has already navigated a few considerable challenges, and, despite some foolish rookie mistakes, his regime remains solidly in control of Syria, while his naive opposition is barely functioning. This would be his first true test as a leader and would define his legacy. During his six years as Syrian president, did he tighten relations with Hamas and Hezbollah because of some ideological commitment? Or did he astutely surmise their rising fortunes and merely ride their coattails to a stronger bargaining position with the United States and Israel? The answers are unclear, but it is worth the risk to discover them.

George Ajjan is a Republican member of the Arab American Institute's National Policy Council.

O --- This article first appeared in the October 2006 issue of Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.
continue reading "A New Path to Peace: The Damascus Road..."

Passaic County: Beaten within an inch of its life, but still breathing

Paul Brubaker at the Herald News bluntly attacked Passaic County's tax crisis in Saturday's paper. Bravo. The paper seems to be sharpening its axe recently, judging by that article, as well as a major exposé in today's paper which will certainly keep Paterson Mayor José "Joey" Torres up at night. And Al Doblin is missing out on all the fun!

Brubaker paints the picture very clearly: Passaic County is out of control, even relative to its peers in a horribly mismanaged state like New Jersey, and its elected leaders are not only powerless to stop it (having effectively sold themselves to the public employee unions), but clueless.

The quote that takes the cake is from Freeholder Sonia Rosado, the weakest of the 3 incumbents defending their posts in the general election which takes place just over 3 weeks from now.

"Fiscally, we're still very sound despite the fact that we have increased taxes. We're not in a crisis. We're not in a position where we are going to be bankrupt."

In other words, My 6 Democrat Freeholder colleagues and I have beaten Passaic County taxpayers within an inch of their lives; but hey, no problem, they're still breathing!

Brubaker goes further into specifics than reporters covering such items on a local level usually bother to go. His research discovered that "nearly half of the county's total appropriation increases were public safety salary, wages, pensions, and benefits, according to county officials." I'm not sure, but perhaps "public safety" is another way of saying the ESS - AYCH - EE - ARE - EYE - EFF - EFF has been spending too much money. But don't tell anyone, it's a secret!!!

The Republican Freeholder challengers Art Soto, Keith LaForgia, and Erik Lowe have a golden opportunity here. Immediately, and in advance of the upcoming debates on October 25 and 26, they need to sit down and break down the budget, department by department, piece by piece, exposing the waste and outlining exactly what specific cuts would be made. Duke it out. Then, make the new Passaic County Republican website impactful and relevant - use it to communicate this budget information (that the Democrats don't want us to see) to the voting public and to the media.

Finally, this needs to be distilled into a simple and effective mailer, giving Passaic County voters an urgent, pocketbook-driven reason why they need to vote Republican on November 7. None of this Kean-Menendez "vote for me because my friends are slightly less sleazy than the other guy's" campaign rubbish - Brubaker's article makes it clear that the voters are ready to bruise up the incumbents, they just need a compelling argument to convince them to do so.
continue reading "Passaic County: Beaten within an inch of its life, but still breathing..."

Hispanics get no respect from Menendez

I will no longer spell the surname of Democrat Senator Robert Menendez with an accent. He doesn't deserve to be addressed with the proper Spanish spelling after the disgusting, racist stunt his campaign pulled recently.

Reeling from the Donald Scarinci tape scandal, Menendez sought to deflect attention by trying to discredit physician Oscar Sandoval, who was at the heart of the controversy revealed on the tapes.

Desperate for a diversion, Menendez's spokesman Matt Miller asserted that Oscar Sandoval was the brother of José Sandoval, the Republican running for Congress against Bill Pascrell in CD-8 (as I did 2 years ago).

Sandoval rightfully went ballistic.

"I do not know Dr. Oscar Sandoval, and he is not related to me in any way, shape, or form. This is blatant racism on behalf of the Menendez campaign. Just because we both have Hispanic surnames does not mean that we are related."

Assemblyman Eric Muñoz, Republican Senatorial candidate Tom Kean's colleague representing District 21 in Trenton, who is of Puerto Rican descent, joined the outrage.

"How dare he (Miller) make such racist assumptions? Just because two Hispanic individuals have the same name that does not mean they are related. Mr. Miller's statements are completely ignorant."

Miller responded with typical arrogance.

"I made the same factual mistake that several reporters and others made, nothing more."

I, for one, join Sandoval and Muñoz in their disgust. How careless and condescending. By Miller's logic, Kean could put out an ad unjustly drawing a close familial connection between his opponent and the infamous Menendez Brothers, convicted in 1996 of murdering their parents in cold blood, and then shrug it off the next day as a "factual mistake".

I also find it shocking that the press largely gave Menendez a pass on this issue. The Hispanic community of NJ certainly deserves a Senator who will give them enough respect to recognize that not everyone with the same surname is related. The fact that Menendez is Hispanic himself makes it even more insulting.

In the meantime, I suggest that Menendez invite Steve Lonegan out for an iced coffee at McDonalds.
continue reading "Hispanics get no respect from Menendez..."

Notes on NJ's race for US Senator

Having been overseas for 6 weeks, and largely insulated from the daily grind of local political developments (though I admit politicsnj.com will find weekly hits from Dakar if they check their web stats), I have somewhat of a unique perspective on the contentious race for US Senate here in NJ.

The background: as the campaign began earlier in the year, Governor Jon Corzine's hand-picked successor, former Congressman Robert Menéndez, seemed the early favorite, if only by virtue of the multi-million dollar fundraising headstart he enjoyed as the third-ranked Democrat in the House of Representatives.

Nevertheless, Republican strategists in DC considered Tom Kean, Jr. the great white hope for the NJ GOP, anticipating a countertrend Senate pickup.

Menéndez, hoping to expose "Junior" (as his campaign referred to their opponent), challenged the son of the popular former NJ Governor to a series of summer TV debates. This move was interpreted in different ways. Some suggested that Menéndez was worried, and that no incumbent favorite would ever seek to offer his opponent a valuable platform. Others argued that the more articulate and experienced Menéndez felt he could bury Kean in the debate, and attempt to convince NJ voters that the apple had fallen very far from the tree.

Menéndez's strategy failed. Though summertime Kean was uncomfortable on camera, expectations were already low, and Menéndez's haughty Al Gore-ish condescending attitude led to a draw in the debates.

As the summer progressed, Kean's fundraising picked up, and he managed to get some traction on ethics, propelling him to a lead in a number of polls.

Current state: Within 2 hours of my plane landing, I had already seen 3 mudslinging commercials. Laying around my parents' house was a copy of the Bergen Record, showing a great photo of Kean at a rally in Morristown surrounded by a smiling group of black kids, but with an obvious slant arguing that Kean was not the independent he claimed to be, citing his State Senate voting record.

Just a few days later, I saw a corresponding article arguing that Menéndez bucked his party regularly, and was not a far-left liberal. For the Bergen Record to weigh in so blatantly suggests that Kean had lost some credibility with the press.

To recover his standing and burnish his independent credentials, Kean called for the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and also for Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert to step down in the wake of the Mark Foley circus. Predictably, however, Kean's moves angered the right-wing, including very active NJ conservative leaders like Michael Illions of GOPUSA, who has been sending emails highly critical of Kean.

Then came the most recent debate, shown this Sunday morning. What a disgrace. Both candidates should be ashamed of such childish behavior. I actually thought at one point that the moderators were going to bluntly scold the candidates and walk off stage. That's how bad it was. I find it hard to believe that any voters were moved by either candidate's performance, although I must mention that Kean's public speaking abilities have improved significantly over the course of this campaign.

Polls now show the race more reflective of national sentiment, and while Menéndez has re-taken the lead, Kean is still within the margin of error and could still pull off a victory in November. In short, New Jersey's US Senate seat is still up for grabs.
continue reading "Notes on NJ's race for US Senator..."