A decade after New Jersey made deep cuts to its public colleges and universities, state funding continues to lag behind pre-recession levels and students are struggling to cope. Students who already face the greatest racial and economic barriers to higher education are particularly at risk of being harmed by rising tuition and fees, and subsequently, rising student loan debt. This jeopardizes not only their futures, but that of the entire Garden State.
New Jersey is one of 19 states that slashed funding for higher education by more than 20 percent per student between 2008 and 2018,according to a new report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. State lawmakers spent 22.6 percent, or $2,278, less per New Jersey student between 2008 and 2018, far outpacing the national average decline of 13 percent or $1,220 per student.
Years of cuts have helped drive up the cost of a college degree, imposing the greatest burden on families of color and those with low and moderate incomes. In New Jersey, the average tuition grew by 18.3 percent, or $2,121, between 2008 and 2018. For students priced out of attending college, the costs are much greater in the long-term as they will not benefit from the greater lifetime earnings that come with having a college degree.
Growing tuition and fees costs also make up a growing share of New Jersey residents’ household income. In 2017, the average price of attendance accounted for 20 percent of the median household income. For Black and Latinx households, the price of attendance accounted for 32 percent and 29 percent of households income, respectively.
Higher tuition and fees can result in sticker shock, where students are dissuaded from enrolling in college even if the net price (including financial aid) doesn’t rise. Increases to costs of attendance also reduce campus diversity, especially among students of color and those from households with low incomes.
Public colleges and universities are important factors in the future success of New Jersey’s students, communities, and the broader economy. Affordable higher education opens the door to widespread opportunities, while being plagued by insurmountable student loan debt does not. Reinvesting in higher education will help ensure that the benefits of higher education are broadly available to all, not just for those who can afford it.
It’s no secret that economic inequality is one of the defining policy issues of our time — but just how bad is it? Last month, the Census released new data showing the gap between those at the top and everyone else is at the highest level ever recorded. Thanks to a new op-ed in the New York Times, there is now striking evidence that shows that inequality is not only widening, but it’s driven in part by the U.S. tax code.
In the new op-ed, David Leonhardt looks at changes in the total tax rate — including local, state, and federal taxes — since 1950. He finds that over the past 70 years, the richest among us have had their total tax rate drastically cut while everyone else has seen their tax rate increase. In fact, for the first time in modern history, the 400 richest Americans pay a lower tax rate than any other income group.
For the millions of everyday New Jerseyans who work hard and make sacrifices to make ends meet, this chart represents infuriating truths. It represents an economic system that benefits those at the very top at the expense of everyone else. It represents a broken political system where policies are written by and for the wealthiest individuals and corporations. It represents decades of austerity, where tax cuts diverted critical funding away from programs and services that benefit the public good, like education and infrastructure. It also represents that inequality doesn’t just happen by accident — it is choices made over the course of decades by those in power.
New Jersey has seen a similarly alarming reduction in taxes for the wealthiest among us over the past decade.
The future prosperity of New Jersey depends, in large part, on investments that we all contribute to through taxes. Together, we repair our roads and bridges, fund our public schools, preserve public parks, and expand mass transportation, all through taxation. However, in an era of budget shortfalls, in large part contributed by the wealthy and corporations not paying their fair share in taxes, we are not able to fund the programs and services that make New Jersey thrive. To reach our goals and help every New Jerseyan succeed, we need to restore fair taxation on the wealthiest among us so we can all prosper together.
On the heels of a new school year, thousands of New Jersey students are setting off to their first college classes. But for many others, college is simply not an option.
One of the biggest barriers to higher education is its growing cost. The sticker price for a college degree is higher than ever before, and as a result, student loan debt is also at an all time high. Despite New Jersey being one of the wealthiest states in the nation, four in ten residents fall below the ALICE income threshold and are considered “working poor.” For students in these families, the ever-increasing cost of higher education can have a chilling effect on college aspirations, with many choosing instead to work out of high school and save.
Fortunately, New Jersey has taken major steps to ensure all students — regardless of their family’s income or immigration status — have a fair shot at going to college. For students undecided on whether to apply, it’s important to know all of the financial assistance options made available by the state.
Since 2018, New Jersey has invested in making community college tuition-free for students who need the assistance the most. First launched as a pilot in 2018, the Community College Opportunity Grant (CCOG) is now available to students enrolled in all of New Jersey’s eighteen community colleges. The program administers a “last-dollar” grant that closes the gap between tuition costs (including fees) and all other federal and state assistance. Since its inception, 5,424 county college students have received CCOG grants totaling $6.015 million. Of these 5,424 students, 251 are New Jersey DREAMers.
The deadline to apply for New Jersey’s CCOG program is Sunday, September 15, 2019.
The CCOG is available to students enrolled at any of New Jersey’s eighteen community colleges. Students must be enrolled in at least six credits for the fall and/or spring semesters and have an adjusted gross income below $65,000. More information about the CCOG is available on the New Jersey Higher Education Assistance Authority website.
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) turns 23 years old today, but we’re not celebrating. Meant to provide families and children facing deep poverty with critical basic assistance and work supports, TANF has, unfortunately, made matters worse for most families.
Before TANF, funding for assistance was open-ended, meaning that if the state provided funds, the federal government guaranteed to match them at 50 percent. With TANF, the federal government placed a five-year limit on assistance for any family, even if the parent had done everything to find and prepare for a job. It also established major work requirements that force many New Jersey parents to work 40 hours a week without being paid any wages in community agencies that do not offer education and workforce training. The real goal of TANF was to pressure parents to take any job, no matter how low the pay or limited the opportunity.
As a result of these harmful changes in the program, the number of New Jersey families enrolled plummeted from 152,000 at its peak in 1981 to just 16,000 in 2017, a drop of about 90 percent despite the rate of poverty remaining largely the same. Whereas prior to TANF all families living in poverty received some level of assistance, under TANF only about 19 percent of families in poverty receive assistance. The amount of cash assistance for each family also decreased to about 25 percent of the federal poverty level in 2017, guaranteeing that these families would continue to live in deep poverty.
Sadly, TANF perpetuates both poverty and growing racial inequity in New Jersey. Families of color have been harmed on two fronts: first, generations of discrimination blocked them from opportunities to escape poverty and build wealth, and then the very program meant to lift these families out of poverty blames them for their situation and continues to treat them as second-class citizens.
The good news is that this is starting to change in New Jersey thanks to growing recognition that the adverse effects of poverty on children cost much more to remedy later. Consistent with the state’s recent emphasis on improving maternal and child health, New Jersey increased the TANF basic assistance level by 32 percent in the last two years. This was the largest increase in the nation during that time and the first increase in three decades. At the same time, lawmakers repealed the draconian practice of denying assistance to newborns to punish mothers for having children while on TANF. New Jersey is also starting to place greater emphasis on education and training to lift families out of poverty and has created a model program that provides home visits to support and stabilize the family.
This is clearly progress, but we need to do more to turn this program around and undo decades of neglect. New Jersey’s basic assistance levels are still lower than those in most states when housing is considered; some parents are penalized for taking good paying jobs; children are not receiving all the child support the federal government allows them; and children are cruelly having their assistance cut off if their parents do not comply with work requirements.
Most of the TANF program needs to change if New Jersey is going to break the cycle of poverty. This is a tall order, but the legislature and Murphy administration have already shown they will not accept a status quo rooted in racism and intolerance, and that the purpose of government is not to keep people down, but to lift them up.
The Trump administration’s most recent attack on Medicaid could hit New Jersey harder than any other state in the nation. Quietly released in July, the proposed rule change would reduce access to medical care for up to 1.7 million seniors, children, people with disabilities and low income workers who must rely on this program as their only source for health coverage. The proposal would repeal the current requirement for states to monitor whether the Medicaid reimbursement is sufficient to ensure enough doctors are participating in Medicaid to provide adequate access to medical services. This will create a major incentive for states to cut reimbursement levels and divert those savings to other state projects unrelated to health care.
The proposal is a greater threat in New Jersey because the state already has the lowest percentage of doctors in the nation who are willing to participate in Medicaid (39 percent), and it’s reimbursement for all services, as a percentage of the Medicare rate (65 percent), is ranked second lowest in the nation. The proposal will harm most health care providers, but it could have an even greater impact on hospitals because the research shows that when consumers have less access to primary care, they end up in the emergency room and drive up charity costs which impacts everyone.
Unfortunately, this is another example of the Trump administration taking administrative action to enact unpopular policies rejected by Congress. The Trump administration has already approved waivers for states to cap Medicaid funding and enacted draconian work requirements, the latter of which has already reduced enrollment substantially even for people who work. The administration has also asked states to submit proposals to block grant Medicaid, even though that was specifically opposed by Congress as part of legislation to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Unless Congress or the courts overturn this rule and previous administrative actions, the future of the entire Medicaid program is under threat.
Consumers and providers who are concerned about this proposed rule must have their comments in to the Centers on Medicare and Medicaid Services by September 13, after which the administration can make it final.
Racial barriers to economic opportunity have played a substantial role in determining today’s income and wealth distribution, in which households of color are overrepresented at the bottom while non-Hispanic white households are heavily overrepresented at the top. According to a new report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), the tax code can affect different races and ethnicities in widely disparate ways, and tax policy changes can either widen or narrow racial disparities.
Overtly racist policies like slavery and confiscation of Native American lands laid the foundation for the deep economic disparities that exist today. The legacy of these policies — combined with racial discrimination today in areas such as housing, employment, and law enforcement — makes it harder for people of color to make economic gains and build wealth.
The cumulative harm of policies that reinforce the legacy of white supremacy is evident in the accumulation of wealth. White households — representing 65 percent of all households in the United States — own 87 percent of the nation’s wealth, and the wealthiest 10 percent of white households own nearly two-thirds of the nation’s wealth. This did not happen by accident, but as a result of centuries of public policy decisions.
Fortunately, there are ways to reform the federal tax code that advance racial equity and reduce income and wealth disparities. This starts with raising significantly more revenue from those who earn the most income and have the most wealth. New revenue could then fund investments that improve economic opportunities for those who earn and own the least.. Regressive, unproductive tax breaks can also be overhauled, while those that are already efficient and inclusive, like the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) can be bolstered.
State and local tax policies are also a powerful tool for widening or narrowing racial disparities. Even state and local tax policies that appear “race neutral” are anything but, as they actually further exacerbate racial disparities. When state and local policymakers design tax policy and decide how to distribute public resources, they effectively choose whether to push back against this history and attempt to rectify existing barriers, or continue with the status quo.
History shows that many of the key tax policy decisions of the past, including supermajority requirements for raising revenue, property tax limits, and adoption of sales taxes often reinforced already profound barriers faced by people of color. In addition, tax administration practices — such as property tax assessments and valuations — were also frequently done in ways that worsened racial inequities.
The good news is that state and local policymakers can implement solutions now that would make a difference, reducing barriers for people of color and improving equity. Fiscal policies that tax the most well-off households to a greater degree, raise revenue for investments that boost opportunity for communities of color, and remove artificial revenue-raising constraints are effective strategies for moving in the right direction.
In New Jersey, there is a path forward to enhance racial equity through the tax code by adding new brackets for top earners and taxing inherited wealth in a more progressive manner. These reforms could fund targeted public investments like K-12 education, higher education, and job training programs, all of which are essential to reducing deeply-rooted racial barriers.
Welcome to NJPP’s FY2020 Budget: Rapid Reaction, your source for commentary and data analysis on next year’s budget. The transcript below was taken from the Jersey Shore — just teasing, we were in NJPP’s conference room — and has been lightly edited.
Lou (Louis Di Paolo, Communications Director): On Sunday, Governor Murphy signed the Fiscal Year 2020 budget, marking an end to another lively “budget season.” Averting a shutdown, the governor ultimately signed the budget passed by the legislature a few weeks ago, meaning no millionaires tax, with some key changes. Specifically, Governor Murphy line-item vetoed $48.5 million in legislative priorities and put another $235 million of spending in a “lock box,” meaning the funds can only be appropriated once the revenue is guaranteed to be there. He also made a deposit into the state’s rainy day fund, which was empty for over a decade.
On the spending side, the state will make another record pension payment, boost funding for NJ Transit, and continue to ramp up funding for public K-12 schools. The budget funds other things, too, but we’ll get to that below. Overall, this is a responsible budget that invests in assets proven to build an economy that works for everyone.
But that’s enough from me — let’s jump right into it.
My first question is for Sheila, and it’s about the rainy day fund. What is it and why is it so important that the state finally deposited money in it?
Sheila (Sheila Reynertson, Senior Policy Analyst): A robust and well-designed rainy day fund can give New Jersey the flexibility it needs to weather the revenue impact of economic downturns or the next major climate change disaster. But for over a decade, New Jersey has had trouble maintaining this emergency fund. Before the Great Recession, the fund held $735 million, or roughly 2.2 percent of annual state spending, which was well below the national average. Then in 2009, the state withdrew the fund’s entire balance in response to the recession—and has made zero deposits since then.
New Jersey was one of only three states (KS, MT) with an estimated zero balance in their rainy day funds at the end of fiscal year 2017. That is a dangerous habit given the fact that all indicators point to another economic slowdown on the horizon. It’s also a habit that credit rating agencies consider a clear-cut symptom of the state’s continuing structural imbalance, insufficient revenue and poor budgetary planning.
New Jersey’s finalized 2020 budget finally turns the page on this risky chapter with the first rainy day fund deposit in 11 years. The $401 million will be kept in a separate fund that can only be accessed in response to economic changes to avoid unexpected drastic cuts to programs.
Lou: That’s great news. So how prepared is the state for the next economic downturn? Extra points if you can incorporate a gif into your answer.
Sheila: Still not that prepared. It’s a good start, but the state needs to continue making deposits like this one well into the future. National budget experts, namely the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, recommend states build up their rainy day funds to at least 15 percent of their annual budget. This one-time deposit isn’t anywhere close to that.
Here’s a live look at New Jersey if a recession hits and this $401 million is all we have saved:
Lou: Extra points for Sheila! So while we’re not totally prepared for the next recession yet, this is a great start that should be commended. To reiterate one of your points, this is the first time in *over a decade* that New Jersey is taking steps to prepare for the next downturn. And if history has taught us anything, it’s that revenue shortfalls, and the subsequent cuts to public programs, disproportionately harm those struggling to make ends meet and communities of color.
Ray, can you elaborate on what next year’s budget does for these communities? Other than the rainy day fund, of course.
Ray (Raymond Castro, Health Policy Director): First, I am so impressed that the governor and the legislature agree that New Jersey must protect and lift up families struggling to make ends meet. There are many initiatives in this budget that help the working class, the very poor, children, seniors and people with disabilities. This is particularly needed given the enormous income and racial disparities in our state (and big shout out to our friends at the New Jersey Institute for Social Justice for reporting on the wealth gap).
New Jersey will not be able to compete in the 21st century until everyone has equal opportunity; we are only as strong as our weakest link. We all should all feel good about this budget because without these supports, far fewer New Jerseyans will ever make it to the middle class and NJ will not prosper as it should. The budget does not nearly meet all of the needs in the state, but there is no question that New Jersey is moving in the right direction.
Sheila: We’re definitely moving in the right direction! Anyone else listen to Gossip?
But before I get the song stuck in my head, Ray, can you name a few initiatives that received a boost in funding? The more specific the better.
Ray: There is an impressive list, but in terms of supporting working families, there was an increase in funding for preschool, a boost to the state Earned Income Tax Credit (which is now one of the highest levels in the nation at 39 percent), more funding for housing assistance, and a bump in aid for community colleges. There is also funding for nursing homes and child care centers to increase staff salaries to reflect the increase in the minimum wage. The budget also requires that the state come up with ways to increase enrollment in the state exchange that will become operational in 2020 and make insurance more affordable.
For the very poor, there was an increase in funding for Temporary Assistance to Needy Families, which will benefit 20,000 children who live in deep poverty. This increase was especially needed because the state has among the lowest grants for families in the country.
There was also an increase in charity care for hospitals that serve low-income New Jerseyans who cannot afford insurance. That will also help to maintain the financial solvency of these hospitals. Also, up to 125,000 SNAP (food stamp) beneficiaries will receive more in nutritional assistance thanks to a slight increase in funding for energy assistance, which qualities them for more in federally funded assistance. That will disproportionately benefit seniors and people with disabilities who have difficulty documenting their energy assistance needs.
Lou: I know this is year two for Governor Murphy, but I can’t help but think what a difference a new administration makes. After the state cut programs like these to the bone, it’s good to see New Jersey is once again investing in ordinary families instead of the wealthy and well-connected. Sheila, any other big appropriations you want to highlight?
Sheila: Absolutely. The biggest winners include NJ Transit, which received an additional $50 million, as requested in the Legislature’s budget. After years of having its operational budget shamelessly raided, more than $457 million has been allocated to the state-run public transit system for FY 2020. It is not nearly enough to fix the damage done during the previous decade, but it’s definitely a step in the right direction. Bumping up my op-ed on this from last year in case anyone’s interested.
The budget includes a record-breaking pension payment of $3.8 billion for public workers and a larger commitment toward property tax relief for senior citizens and the disabled. Finally, the Governor agreed to include an extra $50 million in state aid for costs associated with extraordinary special education as requested by the Legislature. These increases reflect New Jersey’s need to meet its obligations and provide assistance to communities struggling with property taxes.
One important increase that seems to be flying under the radar is the Governor’s decision to include the Legislature’s request to expand Medicaid coverage from 90 days to 180 days after the last day of pregnancy. As far as I can tell, New Jersey is the first state to do so. This appropriation is directly linked to the state’s renewed commitment to addressing its dismal racial disparities in maternal health. Reports from national and regional maternal mortality review committees have consistently indicated that the limited Medicaid coverage after the birth of a child is not enough to serve low-income people who disproportionately suffer from common maternal health complications like hypertension, diabetes and depression. Nearly one in five maternal deaths occur between six weeks and a year following childbirth. Of these deaths, 58 percent are considered preventable. Doubling the eligibility timeline to 6 months is an important component of improving maternal health outcomes in New Jersey and it should be widely celebrated and replicated in other states.
Ray: That’s definitely flying under the radar. Thanks for flagging it for us, Sheila.
Lou: This is why I enjoy having these conversations. I really appreciate you both (and the rest of our colleagues, of course) for digging through the budget line by line so other folks don’t have to.
For those working in the Trenton bubble, you’d think Governor Murphy and legislative leadership were miles apart with their budget priorities, but this list shows that’s not the case. They’re all committed to building New Jersey’s economy from the bottom up and the middle out. That definitely gets lost in a lot of budget reporting.
Before we get to their biggest disagreement (spoiler: it’s the millionaires tax), can we talk about the state health exchange? I know this wasn’t technically in the budget, but the bill had to be passed before lawmakers left for summer break so the state could meet an important federal deadline.
Ray, what can you tell us about the state health exchange? What does this mean for New Jersey’s health care landscape?
Ray: The establishment of the state exchange is enormously important for working families in New Jersey and to defeating the Trump administration’s sabotage of the Affordable Care Act. The legislature and the Murphy administration were in general agreement that such an exchange was greatly needed to be run by the state, but they differed in the details which got ironed out just in time.
By taking over the federal exchange, the state will be able to double the length of the open enrollment period, expand outreach, reduce premiums and decrease the number of residents who are uninsured. It can do all that without any increase in state funds. That is because the fees (about $50 million) that insurers in New Jersey send to the federal government to operate the exchange will instead stay here to fund the state exchange.
In addition, there are over 300,000 uninsured NJ residents who are not participating in the federal exchange, so even if a small percentage of them enroll in the state exchange, the state will see a major increase in premium subsidies which is totally funded by the federal government.
Lou: New Jersey is cementing its position as a national leader in health care policy. I’m not sure there’s another state that has better responded to the Trump administration’s sabotage of the Affordable Care Act. Again, this is a testament to what New Jersey can accomplish when the governor and legislative leaders unite behind a common goal.
But let’s pivot to the biggest point of contention in this year’s “budget season.” We all know that Governor Murphy wanted a millionaires tax in the budget, but legislators weren’t behind it. Instead, they took a page out of the Christie playbook and balanced their budget with rosy revenue projections.
The governor dealt with this in a novel way, putting $235 million in spending prioritized by legislators in a “lock box.” That way, the appropriations will only go out if the revenue exists. Seems like the fiscally prudent thing to do, while also creating some incentive to finally pass a millionaires tax in lame duck. Sheila, what are your thoughts?
Sheila: My first thought is, will you understand this lock box reference? Were you even born before the Bush-Gore election?
Lou: I do not get the reference. I was in third grade, by the way. Definitely not old enough to vote. But back to the question. Thoughts on the lock box?
Sheila: This was a well-played strategy. It gives the Legislature the green light on its funding priorities and allows the governor to use his executive power to hit the pause button until there is a better understanding of where the state economy is headed. It sends a strong message that relying on rosy projections has fallen out of favor and signals to credit rating agencies that the state will implement responsible budgeting practices with or without the cushion of new revenue. The question remains about which priorities are in this “lock box” and at what point will they be reevaluated for funding.
Ray: Agree on all fronts. I’m anxious to see what made it into the box.
Lou: Same here. But I mostly love that the state is moving away from gimmicks and rosy revenue projections. If the state wants to make new investments — which is should — it needs the revenue in place to pay for them. So, the millionaires tax didn’t make it into the budget, but it’s still super important. Do you think it happens in next year’s budget?
Sheila: Honestly, it could happen even sooner. That’s the beauty of the lock box; it creates an incentive for lawmakers to get serious about raising revenue, independent of the craziness of “budget season.” Remember, New Jersey is one of only a few states that still brings in *less* revenue than before the Great Recession. This is proof that New Jersey has a revenue problem, not a spending problem.
Given that the legislature passed a millionaires tax five times under the Christie administration, it is the most logical route toward creating new, sustainable revenue. Plus it remains extremely popular among voters of all political persuasions.
Lou: Well, Donald Trump isn’t a fan. I’m sure you saw his tweet congratulating lawmakers for not passing it?
I can’t imagine this pat on the back was welcomed by legislative leaders. Reaction?
Sheila: It was like Christmas in July!
But strategically, it would have been more helpful a month ago. Lol
Ray: Should I be on Twitter?
Lou: Yes.
Sheila: Yes.
Lou: So it’s settled. Ray, we’re making you a Twitter account! But we should be wrapping this up. Closing thoughts? Opportunities for next year? Plans for your Fourth of July weekend?
Ray: The opportunities for next year are unlimited. NJ has already been ranked number one in the nation in combating the Trump administration’s sabotage of the ACA. Next year, and in the year after, the state needs to focus on operating one of the best state exchanges in the nation with the goal of universal health care coverage. To do that, the state will need to be creative in how to reach the uninsured who are already eligible for federal assistance but are not participating. However, it must also make those New Jerseyans who are not eligible for federal assistance eligible. That includes middle-class families who have incomes that slightly exceed eligibility limits and those who are not eligible because of their immigration status.
That will require considerable state resources, but New Jersey can start with children as those costs will be offset by a decrease in state funding for charity care in hospitals and other savings down the road. Also, New Jersey needs to be much better at reducing total health care costs, which will also reduce state expenditures. It should start with lowering prescription drug costs, which have become unaffordable even for middle class families. The state also needs to start taxing entities in a way that discourages unhealthy behavior and use those revenues to provide comprehensive coverage for all New Jerseyans.
Lou: Fourth of July plans?
Ray: My wife and I are celebrating our anniversary! We got married on July 4th so we would also see fireworks on our anniversary.
Lou: That’s adorable. Congrats, Ray! Sheila?
Sheila:Tubing on the Delaware with 5 families!
Lou: You are both making me feel really lame for not having any plans — yet. But back to the budget. Final thoughts, Sheila?
Sheila: In the end, New Jersey passed a budget that funded its most important obligations and made strides toward investing in the true drivers of a state economy — all without relying on gimmicks and rosy revenue projections. It managed to cut about $1 billion in spending through collective bargaining, make a long overdue deposit into its rainy day fund and have a bit of a cushion in case revenues come in short.
What was strikingly different this budget season was the renewed public interest in Trenton politics after the release of the Comptroller’s audit of the Economic Development Authority and the subsequent task force investigation. The EDA story has it all: insider lobbying, potential fraud and misuse of taxpayer dollars. I think the budget process benefited from the unfolding EDA story as it put Trenton in a bigger spotlight than it’s used to. That’s a good thing, the more the public is engaged with the budget season the more likely the state’s priorities will reflect the values of the many, not just the few.
The law that governs the corporate tax subsidy programs expired at the end of June and the Governor has clearly stated he will not sign the Legislature’s bill to simply expand the law for another 7 months without major reforms. Stay tuned for that showdown!
[Brandon enters the chat]
Brandon (Brandon McKoy, President): Hey team! What did I miss?
Lou: The Knicks didn’t get Kevin Durant. Or Kyrie Irving.
Today, New Jersey’s minimum wage increases to $10.00 an hour. This is the first step on the way to a $15.00 minimum wage and will benefit over half a million workers by increasing their take home pay. Approximately 242,000 workers will get a direct boost in their pay, while an additional 275,000 workers will indirectly benefit as pay scales are adjusted to reflect the new minimum.
The importance of this cannot be overstated as low-paid workers will have greater ability to make ends meet, provide for their families, and participate more fully in their local economies. Businesses will benefit from gaining more customers and New Jersey’s economy will be stronger as a result of this change.
However, farm workers and workers at small businesses won’t be getting an increase until January, and tipped workers are receiving increases that are far too small. There’s still much work to be done to ensure that all workers in New Jersey, no matter what they do, are paid a wage that respects the dignity of their labor and enables them to not just make ends meet, but thrive.
To understand the schedule of the minimum wage increase, check out this blog from earlier in the year where we break down all the ins and outs.
1) It’s Brandon McKoy’s First Conference as President of NJPP
It may be hard to believe, but it’s only been a little more than two months since Brandon McKoy was named President of NJPP. That’s because, coming off the heels of a successful campaign for a $15 minimum wage, Brandon has hit the ground running in his new role and emerged as a leading voice for tax fairness and corporate subsidy reform. Brandon will be giving the introductory remarks at Progress 2019 — his first as President of NJPP — and will moderate panels on the budget and the state of the news media.
2) There’s No Better Place to Examine the Crisis and Opportunity for NJ’s Economic Development Policy
New Jersey’s Economic Development Authority — and the $11 billion it awarded in corporate subsidies — is in the news seemingly every day, and for good reason. A scathing audit, whistleblowers, task force hearings, and investigative reporting have uncovered fraud, abuse, and corruption in the state’s economic incentive programs. New Jersey Public Radio and WNYC’s Nancy Solomon will moderate a panel on ways to revamp the state’s approach to economic development.
3) You’ll Hear the Stories Behind the Numbers from Keynote Speaker Kathryn Edin
Kathryn Edin is one of the nation’s leading poverty researchers and will provide the keynote address on living on almost nothing in New Jersey. Edin, author of $2.00 a Dayand Professor of Sociology and Public Affairs at Princeton University, grounds her qualitative research in people’s stories and lived experiences through direct, in-depth interviews with low-paid workers and their children. As Brandon likes to say, math is real — and Kathryn Edin will show us that behind every fact and figure is a real person experiencing the effects of public policy decisions.
4) You Will Learn (Almost) Everything You Need to Know About New Jersey’s Budget
Budgets are moral documents that outline the priorities of the state. They can help address rising inequality, or make it worse. They can prioritize the many, or a select few. At Progress 2019, Treasurer Muoio and Health Commissioner Dr. Elnahal will headline a panel on creating a state budget that invests in all New Jerseyans, and Rutgers Professor (and NJPP Trustee) Henry Coleman will moderate a discussion on advancing racial equity with state tax policy.
5) And Last, But Certainly Not Least: Community!
You have probably cited their reports, read their commentary in the news, and clicked through their action alerts to email your legislators — but now is your chance to meet your favorite policy leaders face-to-face and hear from them directly. Researchers, advocates, lawmakers, reporters, and Governor Murphy will all be joining NJPP at Progress 2019: New Jersey on the National Stage. Will you?
An informed citizenry and electorate is necessary for any fully functioning democracy to thrive. This is especially true in a state like New Jersey with its 565 municipalities, each bustling with their own unique issues, events and developments. Local news is an invaluable resource that keeps residents informed and, more importantly, plays a key role in helping communities stay civically engaged and invested.
Conversely, the erosion of local news is directly linked to drops in civic participation and social cohesion, threatening democracy as we know it. New Jersey has a vested interest keeping its communities properly informed, and right now that means protecting local journalism and its ability to report on current events in every corner of the state.
Last year, Governor Murphy sought to address this issue head on by signing the Civic Information Consortium (CIC) into law. The CIC is an initiative meant to support local journalism in collaboration with a few of the state’s public universities, including The College of New Jersey (TCNJ), Montclair State University, New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT), Rowan University, and Rutgers University. Specifically, the consortium would solicit proposals from people around the state with innovative ideas to support journalism in their communities. The CIC would have its own staff to manage the fund and a board of directors to develop strategic priorities and approve grants. The board would prioritize funding to proposals that cover communities lacking a local news source, especially underserved communities, low-income communities and communities of color. Unfortunately, the funding necessary for the effort — $5 million in the first year and $1 million each year after — has yet to be secured. The Governor’s FY20 budget proposal has just $1 million in support for this program. In a budget that exceeds $38 billion in fiscal year 2020, New Jersey must make it a priority to dedicate sufficient funds for the CIC.
In early 2009, the Rocky Mountain News folded and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer became an online-only publication. Researchers looked at the change in civic engagement after these events through a number of different metrics, including the number of residents who: 1) contacted a public official; 2) boycotted a product or service; 3) held membership in a neighborhood group; 4) help membership in a civic group; and 5) acted as an officer in a group. Compared to 8 other cities with their own dedicated newspapers still in business, Seattle and Denver saw a significant decline in civic engagement by most metrics.
Another study, this one of Cincinnati and its surrounding suburbs, assessed the impact of losing the Cincinnati Post in 2007. It found that, “fewer people voted in elections for city council, city commission, and school board; fewer candidates sought those seats; the remaining candidates spent less money on their campaigns; and, for councils and commissions, [and] incumbents’ chances of retaining office improved.” The report failed to find similar results in those Cincinnati communities served by the Cincinnati Enquirer, a paper that did not close.
The Economic Impact of Watchdog Reporting
Quality, local journalism requires robust resources in order to produce content that fosters civic engagement and promotes good government and healthy communities. Multiple studies have demonstrated that the public benefit that comes from quality press coverage makes government more accountable and communities more liveable. This is how it works: more sophisticated political coverage makes voters better informed, which increases oversight and induces politicians to be more industrious which, finally, produces better policies and outcomes for their constituencies.
A National Bureau of Economic Research working paper found that members of Congress who are covered with less frequency by the local press in their districts produce less benefit for their constituencies, according to things like their voting record, participation in hearings or serving on constituency-oriented committees. Without the built-in accountability fostered by local journalism, less federal dollars are invested in communities that lack adequate political reporting.
And in Democracy’s Detectives: The Economics of Investigative Journalism, Stanford University Professor James Hamilton examined the political and social change sparked by journalism and found that “each dollar spent on stories can generate hundreds of dollars of benefits to society.” Just one journalist can have an enormous impact, as illustrated by the case study of Pulitzer Prize–winning reporter Pat Stith of The News and Observer in Raleigh, NC. Stitch pursued over 150 investigations that led to the passage of dozens of state laws. We’ve seen similar achievements in New Jersey based on these excellent examples of journalism: a deep dive into the failures of New Jersey’s medical examiner system; an investigative report detailing a culture of sexual harassment and assault of inmates in state women’s prisons; and a look at Rutgers’ refusal to investigate sexual harassment claims against its professors.
Local News Builds Community and Community Builds Local News
As demonstrated by the infamous Bridgegate saga, local coverage is often the first to break a major story before it enters the national conversation. This is especially important in New Jersey, being the only state without its own major media market, with the New York market to the north and Philadelphia market to the south. Local journalists who break major stories are writing the first drafts of history, as their work eventually becomes an important reference for communities, historians, social scientists, and even epidemiologists. These diverse scholars have started to raise the alarm that losing local news and place-specific information cuts off communities who may be facing a crisis — like the lead poisoning in Flint. Losing local news sources also makes garnering national attention for critical issues much harder.
One of the core pillars of any healthy democracy is an informed public, especially when it comes to political issues. A strong local news outlet best serves its community when it creates an ecosystem of healthy debate and exchange of ideas to build social cohesion and empathy. In fact, the two actually reinforce each other: local newspapers are important to community engagement and those who feel connected to their community have stronger ties to local news.
State budgets are moral documents that represent that priorities and will of residents; making a commitment to support the CIC with state dollars sends a clear message that New Jersey values local news and recognizes its social and economic contributions to a thriving democracy.
