MICHAEL O. ALLEN

Tag

government

“Gonna be a Bumpy Ride”

By HomepageNo Comments

The Central Virginia Progressive-The DAVISReport sends us

Foreshadowing the “R” Word- A Day Late and Many Dollars Short

Our Government is finally admitting what seems to surprise only them, that we are in a recession and have been for some time. “Duh”?! The following is a re-posting of a previous entry on this blog originally dated July 11,2008. Read in today’s light it seems like a 1,000 years ago and a lot more unsettling . . .

I just got back from a trip to California, going from Mexico to San Francisco, and other than the shore line, it is one big brown state. And the smoke, when you see all that dry dessert grass on the mountains, you get an understanding of their fire risk and why that state won’t stop burning.

In Mexico I learned two things I didn’t know. First California was named by early Mexican natives and it means “hot oven” and second it is a statement of accepted fact there that the U.S. is in a recession. My personal, though admittedly limited, international focus group collection data revealed that our international neighbors throw the fact of our recession around pretty comfortably and seem unaware that our own administration states we aren’t in one.

(“Oh Amigo, tourism is down due to American recession”; “The artisans will barter as business is down due to the American recession”). Is it important what the rest of the world observes about our economic health? I think so.

Read More

Leadership

By HomepageNo Comments

President-Elect Barack Obama Holds First Press Conference

Transcript of the news conference:

Obama: Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you very much.

This morning, we woke up to more sobering news about the state of our economy. The 240,000 jobs lost in October marks the 10th consecutive month that our economy has shed jobs. In total, we’ve lost nearly 1.2 million jobs this year, and more than 10 million Americans are now unemployed.

Tens of millions of families are struggling to figure out how to pay the bills and stay in their homes. Their stories are an urgent reminder that we are facing the greatest economic challenge of our lifetime, and we’re going to have to act swiftly to resolve it.

Now, the United States has only one government and one president at a time. And until January 20th of next year, that government is the current administration.

I’ve spoken to President Bush. I appreciate his commitment to ensuring that his economic policy team keeps us fully informed as developments unfold. And I’m also thankful for his invitation to the White House.

Immediately after I become president, I’m going to confront this economic crisis head on by taking all necessary steps to ease the credit crisis, help hardworking families, and restore growth and prosperity.

And this morning, I met with members of my Transition Economic Advisory Board, who are standing behind me, alongside my vice president-elect, Joe Biden.

They will help to guide the work of my transition team, working with Rahm Emanuel, my chief of staff, in developing a strong set of policies to respond to this crisis. We discussed in the earlier meeting several of the most immediate challenges facing our economy and key priorities on which to focus on in the days and weeks ahead.

First of all, we need a rescue plan for the middle class that invests in immediate efforts to create jobs and provide relief to families that are watching their paychecks shrink and their life savings disappear.

A particularly urgent priority is a further extension of unemployment insurance benefits for workers who cannot find work in the increasingly weak economy.

A fiscal stimulus plan that will jump-start economic growth is long overdue. I’ve talked about it throughout this — the last few months of the campaign. We should get it done.

Second, we have to address the spreading impact of the financial crisis on the other sectors of our economy: small businesses that are struggling to meet their payrolls and finance their holiday inventories; and state and municipal governments facing devastating budget cuts and tax increases.

We must also remember that the financial crisis is increasingly global and requires a global response.

The news coming out of the auto industry this week reminds us of the hardship it faces, hardship that goes far beyond individual auto companies to the countless suppliers, small businesses and communities throughout our nation who depend on a vibrant American auto industry.

The auto industry is the backbone of American manufacturing and a critical part of our attempt to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

I would like to see the administration do everything it can to accelerate the retooling assistance that Congress has already enacted. In addition, I have made it a high priority for my transition team to work on additional policy options to help the auto industry adjust, weather the financial crisis, and succeed in producing fuel-efficient cars here in the United States of America.

And I was glad to be joined today by Governor Jennifer Granholm, who obviously has great knowledge and great interest on this issue.

I’ve asked my team to explore what we can do under current law and whether additional legislation will be needed for this purpose.

Third, we will review the implementation of this administration’s financial program to ensure that the government’s efforts are achieving their central goal of stabilizing financial markets while protecting taxpayers, helping homeowners, and not unduly rewarding the management of financial firms that are receiving government assistance.

It is absolutely critical that the Treasury work closely with the FDIC, HUD, and other government agencies to use the substantial authority that they already have to help families avoid foreclosure and stay in their homes.

Finally, as we monitor and address these immediate economic challenges, we will be moving forward in laying out a set of policies that will grow our middle class and strengthen our economy in the long term. We cannot afford to wait on moving forward on the key priorities that I identified during the campaign, including clean energy, health care, education, and tax relief for middle-class families.

My transition team will be working on each of these priorities in the weeks ahead, and I intend to reconvene this advisory board to discuss the best ideas for responding to these immediate problems.

Let me close by saying this. I do not underestimate the enormity of the task that lies ahead. We have taken some major action to date, and we will need further action during this transition and subsequent months.

Some of the choices that we make are going to be difficult. And I have said before and I will repeat again: It is not going to be quick, and it is not going to be easy for us to dig ourselves out of the hole that we are in.

But America is a strong and resilient country. And I know we will succeed, if we put aside partisanship and politics and work together as one nation. That’s what I intend to do.

With that, let me open it up for some questions. And I’m going to start right here with you.

Question: Thank you, Mr. President-elect. I wonder what you think any president can accomplish during their first 100 days in office to turn the economy around? How far can you go? And what will be your priorities on day one?

Obama: Well, I think that a new president can do an enormous amount to restore confidence, to move an agenda forward that speaks to the needs of the economy and the needs of middle-class families all across the country.

I’ve outlined during the course of the campaign some critical issues that I intend to work on.

We have a current financial crisis that is spilling out into rest of the economy, and we have taken some action so far. More action is undoubtedly going to be needed. My transition team is going to be monitoring very closely what happens over the course of the next several months.

The one thing I can say with certainty is that we are going to need to see a stimulus package passed either before or after inauguration.

We are going to have to focus on jobs, because the hemorrhaging of jobs has an impact, obviously, on consumer confidence and the ability of people to — to buy goods and services and can have enormous spillover effects.

And I think it’s going to be very important for us to provide the kinds of assistance to state and local governments to make sure that they don’t compound some of the problems that are already out there by having to initiate major layoffs or initiate tax increases.

So there are some things that we know we’re going to have to do, but I’m confident that a new president can have an enormous impact. That’s why I ran for president.

Question: (off-mike) … from House Democrats that the stimulus package may be in trouble, that it’s going to be a hard time getting out of a lame-duck session. Are you still confident that you would be able to get something done before you actually take office?

Obama: I want to see a stimulus package sooner rather than later. If it does not get done in the lame-duck session, it will be the first thing I get done as president of the United States.

Question: Senator, for the first time since the Iranian revolution, the president of Iran sent a congratulations note to a new U.S. president. I’m wondering if, first of all, if you responded to President Ahmadinejad’s note of congratulations and, second of all, and more importantly, how soon do you plan on sending low-level envoys to countries such as Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba, to see if a presidential-level talk would be productive?

Obama: I am aware that the letter was sent. Let me state — repeat what I stated during the course of the campaign.

Iran’s development of a nuclear weapon I believe is unacceptable. And we have to mount a international effort to prevent that from happening.

Iran’s support of terrorist organizations I think is something that has to cease.

I will be reviewing the letter from President Ahmadinejad, and we will respond appropriately. It’s only been three days since the election. Obviously, how we approach and deal with a country like Iran is not something that we should, you know, simply do in a knee- jerk fashion. I think we’ve got to think it through.

But I have to reiterate once again that we only have one president at a time. And I want to be very careful that we are sending the right signals to the world as a whole that I am not the president and I won’t be until January 20th.

Question: Picking up what we were just talking about, your meeting with President Bush on Monday. When — he is still the decider, obviously, stating the obvious. When you disagree with decisions he makes, will you defer? Will you challenge? Will you confront? And if it becomes confrontational, could that rattle the markets even more?

Obama: Well, President Bush graciously invited Michelle and I to — to meet with him and First Lady Laura Bush. We are gratified by the invitation. I’m sure that, in addition to taking a tour of the White House, there’s going to be a substantive conversation between myself and the president.

I’m not going to anticipate problems. I’m going to go in there with a spirit of bipartisanship and a sense that both the president and various leaders in Congress all recognize the severity of the situation right now and want to get stuff done.

And, you know, undoubtedly there may end up being differences between not just members of different parties, but between people within the same party.

The critical point and I think the critical tone that has to be struck by all of us involved right now is the American people need help. This economy is in bad shape. And we have just completed one of the longest election cycles in recorded history.

Now is a good time for us to set politics aside for a while and think practically about what will actually work to move the economy forward. And it’s in that spirit that I’ll have the conversation with the president.

Question: Thank you, Mr. President-elect. With the country facing two wars and a financial crisis, do you think it’s important for you to move especially quickly to fill key cabinet posts, such as treasury secretary and secretary of state?

Obama: When we have an announcement about cabinet appointments, we will make them. There is no doubt that I think people want to know who’s going to make up our team.

And I want to move with all deliberate haste, but I want to emphasize “deliberate” as well as “haste.” I’m proud of the choice I made of vice president, partly because we did it right. I’m proud of the choice of chief of staff, because we thought it through.

And I think it’s very important, in all these key positions, both in the economic team and the national security team, to — to get it right and not to be so rushed that you end up making mistakes.

I’m confident that we’re going to have an outstanding team, and we will be rolling that out in subsequent weeks.

Question: Yes, sir. To what extent — to what extent are you planning to use your probably pretty great influence in determining the successor for your Senate seat? And what sort of criteria should the governor be looking at in filling that position?

Obama: This is the governor’s decision; it is not my decision.

And I think that the criteria that I would have for my successor would be the same criteria that I’d have if I were a voter: somebody who is capable; somebody who is passionate about helping working families in Illinois meet their — meet their dreams.

And I think there are going to be a lot of good choices out there, but it is the governor’s decision to make, not mine.

Lynn Sweet?

Question: Mr. President-elect …

Obama: What happened to your arm, Lynn?

Question: I cracked my shoulder running to your speech on election night.

Obama: Oh, no.

(Laughter)

Question: (inaudible)

Obama: I think that was the only major incident during the — the entire Grant Park celebration.

Question: Thank you for asking. Here’s my question. I’m wondering what you’re doing to get ready. Have you spoke to any living ex-presidents, what books you might be reading?

Everyone wants to know, what kind of dog are you going to buy for your girls? Have you decided on a private or public school for your daughters?

Obama: Let — let me list those off.

In terms of speaking to former presidents, I’ve spoken to all of them that are living. Obviously, President Clinton — I didn’t want to get into a Nancy Reagan thing about, you know, doing any seances.

I have re-read some of Lincoln’s writings, who’s always an extraordinary inspiration.

And, by the way, President Carter, President Bush, Sr., as well as the current president have all been very gracious and offered to provide any help that they can in this transition process.

With respect to the dog, this is a major issue. I think it’s generated more interest on our Web site than just about anything.

We have — we have two criteria that have to be reconciled. One is that Malia is allergic, so it has to be hypoallergenic. There are a number of breeds that are hypoallergenic.

On the other hand, our preference would be to get a shelter dog, but, obviously, a lot of shelter dogs are mutts like me. So — so whether we’re going to be able to balance those two things I think is a pressing issue on the Obama household.

And with respect to schools, Michelle will be — will be scouting out some schools. We’ll be making a decision about that in the future.

Question: You are now privy to a lot of intelligence that you haven’t had access to before, in fact, much of what the president sees, I’m sure all of it.

First of all, do you — what do you think about the state of U.S. intelligence, whether you think it needs beefing up, whether you think there’s enough interaction between the various agencies?

And, second of all, has anything that you’ve heard given you pause about anything you’ve talked about on the campaign trail?

Obama: Well, as you know, if — if there was something I had heard, I couldn’t tell you. But…

Question: (off-mike)

Obama: I have received intelligence briefings. And I will make just a general statement.

Our intelligence process can always improve. I think it has gotten better. And, you know, beyond that, I don’t think I should comment on the nature of the intelligence briefings.

That was a two-parter. Was there another aspect to that?

Question: Well, just whether — you know, absent what you’ve heard…

Obama: OK, I get you.

Question: … whether anything has given you pause.

Obama: I’m going to skip that.

Question: Mr. President-elect, do you still intend to seek income tax increases for upper-income Americans? And if so, should these Americans expect to pay higher taxes in 2009?

Obama: The — my tax plan represented a net tax cut. It provided for substantial middle-class tax cuts; 95 percent of working Americans would receive them.

It also provided for cuts in capital gains for small businesses, additional tax credits. All of it is designed for job growth.

My priority is going to be, how do we grow the economy? How do we create more jobs?

I think that the plan that we’ve put forward is the right one, but, obviously, over the next several weeks and months, we’re going to be continuing to take a look at the data and see what’s taking place in the economy as a whole.

But, understand, the goal of my plan is to provide tax relief to families that are struggling, but also to boost the capacity of the economy to grow from the bottom up.

All right. Thank you very much, guys.

BLEAK ASSESSMENT OF WAR ON DRUGS; Torricelli Issues Report

By Homepage, The RecordNo Comments

By Michael O. Allen, Record Staff Writer | Sunday, April 5, 1992

The Record (New Jersey) | All Editions | NEWS | A34

Although winnable, the war on drugs is now being lost, at least on the international front.

That was the conclusion of Rep. Robert G. Torricelli, D-Englewood, in a status report he gave to Bergen County law enforcement officials in Hackensack on Friday. In a 30-minute briefing that had little good news, he offered a bleak assessment of the struggle.

“The battle against the growers is largely lost,” said Torricelli, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on Western Hemisphere affairs. “While we’ve dramatically increased federal spending, the actual coca production rate has increased 400 percent.”

The U.S. government has spent almost $12 billion since 1982 to fight drugs, he said.

However, much of that ended up in the pockets of narcotics traffickers, who then used the money to buy protection from Andean nations law enforcement agencies charged with halting their illegal trade, Torricelli added.

He called for a renewed effort against drugs on the home front, in “our families, schools, and communities, and not in the jungle of Peru.”

“We’ve lost battles, but there is no reason not win the war,” he said.

Fort Lee Police Chief John Orso, one of about 70 police chiefs, narcotics officers, and county officials present, cited the success of the Drug Abuse Resistance Education program in the borough’s public schools. He said that effort should be intensified as a way to cut down on the demand for drugs.

Paramus Police Chief Joseph Delaney recalled testifying before a U.S. Senate committee in 1975, when the war on drugs was focused on the heroin trade in Turkey. The problem then, as now, was that communities and local law enforcement agencies were starved of resources to wage a credible war.

Echoing the sentiment of many in the audience, Delaney asked Torricelli what he had to offer them in terms of additional resources.

A crime bill passed recently by the House of Representatives and now being considered by the Senate contains $3 billion for local programs, Torricelli said. However, he said, it contains a provision calling for a seven-day waiting period to purchase guns.

President Bush has promised to veto legislation containing gun-control measures, he said.

Englewood Police Capt. C. Kenneth Tinsley asked Torricelli about incentives to encourage law enforcement officers and other public employees to live in the communities in which they work. City neighborhoods could be stabilized by the presence of these officers, he said.

One of the reasons many give for not living in the community is the high cost of housing, Tinsley added. Bergen County Executive William “Pat” Schuber answered that the county Housing Authority is considering a proposal to aid public employees, especially law enforcement workers, with low-interest loans and mortgages.

Caption: PHOTO – Rep. Robert G. Torricelli, D-Englewood, speaking Friday in Hackensack at a briefing on the war on drugs. AL PAGLIONE / THE RECORD –

ID: 17373429 | Copyright © 1992, The Record (New Jersey)

VICTORY FOR JAIL COULD BE A LOSS; Hearings Resume on Overcrowding

By Homepage, The RecordNo Comments

By Michael O. Allen, Record Staff Writer | Wednesday, January 29, 1992

The Record (New Jersey) | 5 Star | NEWS | Page B01

In an ironic twist to a class-action suit seeking to reduce overcrowding at the Bergen County Jail, a high-ranking county official says the county could wind up a loser if it wins the case.

Jerrold B. Binney, chief of staff to county Executive William “Pat” Schuber, said Tuesday that the state might walk away from the jail’s problems, if the recommendation of special master James R. Zazzali goes against the Department of the Public Advocate. It filed the federal suit in behalf of jail inmates in 1988.

The state and county are defendants in the case. Hearings on the suit were scheduled to resume today, after negotiations on an out-of-court settlement reached an impasse late last year.

Of 984 inmates in the jail which has a rated capacity of 423 379 are state prisoners, said a spokeswoman for Bergen County Sheriff Jack Terhune.

Binney, who has been designated by Schuber to speak for the county on the issue, said that the county has maintained all along that the state is to blame for the overcrowding and a host of other problems at the jail.

If the state and county win, he added, the state would have no incentive to decrease the number of state prisoners in the jail, or to increase its per-diem subsidy for state prisoners.

Binney says the county may sue the state to get it to address the county’s concerns.

“We’ve already done that in one instance, on the per-diem issue,” he said. “We’ve joined the Gloucester County suit on the per-diem cost because, right now, it is draining our treasury.

“We get $45 a day from the state,” he went on. “That’s what we’ve been getting for about 12 years, and everybody knows the costs have been going up. We feel that at a minimum at a minimum it’s costing us $65 a day to house those state prisoners, and that’s not even including some capital costs.”

The Bergen County freeholders are to consider the per-diem issue at their next meeting, deciding how much to ask of the court in the Gloucester case.

Deputy Attorney General Patricia Leuzzi, representing the state Corrections Department in the suit, said she had not been notified that Bergen County joined the Gloucester suit.

Leuzzi also said she was reluctant to discuss the issues discussed during settlement talks, but that the state does not dispute that the per-diem rate needs to increase. The state Legislature is responsible for such an increase, she said.

“The budget is limited,” she said. “The governor and the Legislature are making difficult decisions on what can be funded. Things are being cut back. There are complaints from every constituent.”

Deputy Public Advocate Audrey Bomse, who is handling the class-action suit, said the state deliberately overloads the county jails in order to avoid having its prisons declared unconstitutional.

Bomse said that overcrowding exacerbates the violation of inmates constitutional rights, and that an expert for the public advocate would testify today that, with the exception of health care, “almost next to nothing has been done to ameliorate” problems at the jail.

Among the problem areas cited were lack of exercise, poor lighting, improper sanitation, inadequate protection of inmates from other inmates, and a rising level of violence between inmates and corrections officers.

Corrections Department spokesman James Stabile said that overcrowding results from state prisons taking in more inmates than they let out. In 1991, for instance, 11,559 inmates came into state prisons and 8,216 were paroled, leaving a monthly average surplus of 279 inmates.

New Jersey is one of only five states in the nation not under a court order to drastically reduce its prison population, said Betsy Bernat, a spokeswoman for the National Prison Project of the American Civil Liberties Union. The project seeks to reduce prison populations.

Bernat said the reasons vary among the five states. Vermont, Montana, and North Dakota have no prison overcrowding largely because they are sparsely populated states, and Minnesota doesn’t because it imprisons only the most dangerous criminals.

She agreed with Bomse that New Jersey, which operates at about 135 percent of its prison capacity, was able to stave off a court order by “backing up its prisoners into the county jail system.”

ID: 17367308 | Copyright © 1992, The Record (New Jersey)

N.J. BRIDGING RIFT WITH MUSLIMS

By Homepage, The RecordNo Comments

By Michael O. Allen, Record Staff Writer | Monday, October 7, 1991

The Record (New Jersey) | All Editions | NEWS | Page A05

A faux pas by state Attorney General Robert J. Del Tufo for which he has since apologized is serving to bridge a perceived chasm between the Department of Law and Public Safety and the state’s Muslim communities.
A further step in the healing process which follows published remarks by Del Tufo warning of possible terrorism by Muslims in New Jersey during the Persian Gulf war was a meeting Sunday afternoon at the Dar-Ul-Islah Mosque in Teaneck.
Assistant Attorney General James F. Mulvihill met with about 200 worshipers at the mosque to explain state standards for investigating bias incidents.
Del Tufo appointed Mulvihill as liaison between his office and Muslims following a meeting in August with a seven-member Muslim delegation to discuss his remarks. Mulvihill was accompanied by Bergen County Prosecutor John J. Fahy, who also addressed the audience, which included Teaneck Mayor Eleanor M. Kieliszek.
Mulvihill told his audience that the laws and procedure for reporting bias crimes are in place, but that a Muslim who is a victim of a bias attack must report the incident to police so it can be “thoroughly and promptly investigated.”
Mulvihill said that of 824 bias crimes reported to the state police in 1990, six including two at the Dar-Ul-Islah Mosque were directed at Muslims.
“What we have to do in government is to send a loud and clear message that hate crime is not going to be tolerated,” Mulvihill said.
He urged his listeners to get involved in countywide community-relations boards so they could educate the public about their lives and culture.
He also urged them to apply to join police forces and to run for seats on boards of education and other public bodies, noting that that is how most immigrant groups in this country managed to have their voices heard.
Waheed Khalid, a member of the executive committee of the Dar-Ul-Islah Mosque, served as moderator during the meeting, which also included a question-and-answer session. Much of the ill will from Del Tufo’s remarks has dissipated because of the meeting in August and steps he has since taken to reach out to Muslims, Khalid said.
Muslims face the challenge of going out and educating the public about their religion and way of life, Khalid said.

Keywords: GOVERNMENT; NEW JERSEY; ATTORNEY; TERRORISM; MOSLEM; PERSIAN GULF WAR; TEANECK

ID: 17357406 | Copyright © 1991, The Record (New Jersey)

MEDIA UNFAIR, TEAMSTERS LOCAL SAYS

By Homepage, The RecordNo Comments

By MICHAEL O. ALLEN | Sunday, October 6, 1991

The Record (New Jersey) | All Editions | NEWS | Page A07

Members of Teamsters Local 560 marched to the state’s largest media outlets Saturday to protest what they called unfair news coverage of the union’s battle with government to elect its own leaders.
Starting with a rally in front of the local’s office in Union City, about 100 members came to The Record, then went to WWOR-TV in Secaucus. Newark police could not confirm whether the members went to The Star-Ledger in Newark, as they had announced they would.
When Local 560 filed a petition in U.S. District Court in Newark three weeks ago to end the six-year trusteeship of the union, “the news media gave minimal coverage,” said Bob Marra, secretary-treasurer of the local. “When the government filed their return brief . . . all the news media, including The Record, gave it front-page coverage.”
The government opposed the appointment of former President Michael Sciarra as business agent. In January, a federal judge banned him from positions of influence, ruling that the Genovese crime family was trying to resume control of the Teamsters through him. Sciarra is appealing the decision.

Keywords: HACKENSACK; MEDIA; UNION; GOVERNMENT; ELECTION; NEWSPAPER; DEMONSTRATION; UNION CITY; THE RECORD; SECAUCUS

ID: 17357314 | Copyright © 1991, The Record (New Jersey)

SETTLEMENT IN WORKS FOR JAIL OVERCROWDING LAWSUIT

By Homepage, The RecordNo Comments

By Michael O. Allen, Record Staff Writer | Thursday, July 25, 1991

The Record (New Jersey) | Four Star B | NEWS | Page B01

A 1988 federal lawsuit seeking to reduce overcrowding and improve conditions at the Bergen County Jail is nearing a settlement, the state Public Advocate Department says.
“We still have to fine-tune it,” said Audrey Bomse, an attorney for the agency, which represents the inmates. “I would say it’s a matter of months.”
Murshell Johnson, assistant Bergen County counsel, declined to discuss the case.
Patricia Leuzzi, special assistant to Attorney General Robert J. Del Tufo and the lawyer representing the state in the lawsuit, acknowledged that the inmate population and jail conditions were two major topics in the ongoing talks.
The October 1988 lawsuit, filed by the Office of Inmate Advocacy and nine inmates, charged that overcrowding at the jail creates conditions that make it unfit for human habitation and violates inmates constitutional rights.
Bergen County contended during hearings in 1990 that the conditions were not inhuman and that the New Jersey Corrections Department was responsible for the overcrowding. More than 300 of the jail’s roughly 1,000 inmates should be housed in a state prison, Bergen County lawyers charged.
In two recent letters to the state Corrections Department, Bergen County Sheriff Jack Terhune warned that an overload of state inmates was making the county jail unmanageable. Under a state executive order signed in 1981 and renewed every six months since, Bergen County must take 72 state inmates. About 425 inmates now in the jail are state prisoners.
Recently, inmates were put in disciplinary “lockdowns” following a food fight and a separate gang attack.

Keywords: BERGEN COUNTY; PRISON; LAWSUIT; NEW JERSEY; GOVERNMENT

ID: 17350593 | Copyright © 1991, The Record (New Jersey)