GUEST: Bridgegate is so NOT over: Chris Christie and the Priorities of the Privileged
By Linda Stamato
In the wake of “Bridgegate,” press coverage shifted from near adulation of Chris Christie to embarrassed incredulity; the artful politician, poised to become a presidential contender, was reduced in a heartbeat to a tarnished pretender. The phrase, “He can’t lose,” morphed into “He can’t win.”
Well, we’re witnessing a shift back and for no apparent reason other than the limited attention span of the public and the press (not to mention the effective spin of state and national political machines.) “’Bridgegate’ is SO over, let’s move on.” about sums up the message.
But, it’s never been just about the massive tie-up of the traffic at the GWB and the antics of Christie’s side-kicks in this particular political adventure. What the scandal opened up, or gave folks comfort in scrutinizing, openly, is far more important than that caper, however significant and probably, for the acts of some, illegal that it was.
It is about these things too:
. Corrupting the Port of New York and New Jersey Authority in a multitude of ways that have been recounted over and over in the press (and some of which are under investigation by the SEC and the Manhattan District Attorney in New York State and the US Attorney in New Jersey, not to mention the subject of continuing legislative hearings);
. Mismanaging the public’s money in ways that advantage him and his supporters by, among other things, cutting payments to the pension funds; diverting earmarked funds from federal projects to state projects–to avoid having New Jersey responsible for essential infrastructure spending (requiring funds that he’d have to raise and, of course, taxes are anathema to aspiring Republican presidential candidates); questionable diversion of Hurricane Sandy funds to projects associated with political supporters barely touched by the storm, etc., etc., etc.; and disadvantaging those unlikely to provide support to him in future campaigns, including those from whom he removed the unearned income tax credit. But, you know, if it costs you more in what you pay the state, you can call it anything you like but the impact is the same; you’re paying more with the ending of the unearned income tax credit than you were paying when it was in force. The tax credit ended, thanks to Christie, in 2010, and every effort to restore it, he has vetoed, along with other programs that are GUEST: Bridgegate is so NOT over: Chris Christie and the Priorities of the Privileged | Bob Braun's Ledger:
