Assembly Republicans

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT ...
WHY CORRUPTION PERSISTS

Editorial, The Record of Hackensack, December 17, 2006

New Jersey merits a mention in the venerable Harper's Index in the newest issue of Harper's magazine. It is not a flattering reference.

"Minimum number of New Jersey public officials who have been indicted since 2002: 104."

The Harper's Index tries to surprise readers with its list of statistics from around the world. But in this case, it may have shot too low. The Associated Press reports that the number of New Jersey government officials indicted on either state or federal charges since 2002 is about 200. That number might surprise even the hardened residents of this state: 200 indictments in four years averages 50 a year, or four a month.

Indictments of New Jersey public officials have become as regular as rain. Even when we go through an occasional dry period, we know they will come again. To understand why, one need only look at what happened in Trenton last week.

A provision that would have barred elected officials convicted of corruption from receiving public pensions was deleted from a pension-reform measure.

It is a no-brainer that public officials convicted of malfeasance should lose their pensions. Taxpayers should not have to support the retirement of officials who abused their trust. But the sponsors of the pension bill, Senate President Richard Codey, D-Essex, and Assemblywoman Nellie Pou, D-Paterson, say the provision was removed temporarily because of concerns about fairness: If corrupt elected officials stand to lose pensions, should government employees found guilty of corruption forfeit their retirement pay as well?

Fair question. But the answer is obvious: Both corrupt government employees and elected officials should lose pensions.

Codey says legislators are also weighing whether a convicted official with more than one pension should lose them all or just the one for the position that was abused. Say a former teacher elected as a legislator is found guilty of taking kickbacks. Should this official keep the teacher's pension because the corruption didn't pertain to that job?

Codey says yes. He should reconsider.

Allowing convicted public servants to keep government pensions unrelated to the corruption means some will suffer no significant reduction in retirement pay. They might even make out better than they do now.

An example is former Hudson County Assemblyman Anthony Impreveduto, convicted last year of theft and criminal corruption. Two months after his conviction, Impreveduto began collecting a public pension.

Under current law, pension boards have the power to reduce or eliminate retirement pay. Impreveduto had amassed his pension from 33 years working in public schools. A month after he began collecting it, the teachers' pension board reduced it from about $55,000 to $40,000 because of his conviction. The board didn't go far enough.

Corruption flourishes in New Jersey because the public and government do not take necessary steps to stop it. One crucial step is stiff punishment. Senators should reinsert in the pension bill the provision on convicted officials forfeiting retirement pay. It should apply to government workers too, and it should require the elimination of all of an individual's public pensions.

The measure also originally called for mandatory jail time for convicted officials. That should be restored. Too many convicted officials escape jail through plea deals. Impreveduto did.

With 200 officials indicted in the past four years, now is not the time to go easy on corruption. Who knows, maybe strict pension forfeiture rules would cause officials to think twice before accepting bribes.

# # # # #