POST ELECTION THOUGHTS.

I am in good company for issuing an apology, although mine has to do only with a late posted blog not a national misadventure.

A Thursday afternoon/evening that included a visit to the orthopedist, a visit to the Temple Sholom exhibit, and final to the Mapp Transition Team meeting, followed by watching the second half of the Stanford domination of  #2 Oregon used up all the available hours before sleep.

Net results; my pitching arm is still weak, the exhibit is a well done photo dominated reminder of part of the golden era of Plainfield’s history, and the presence of over 120 participants willing to help our next mayor is most heartening for the future.

So much for chit chat. This past election once again has raised several questions some of which were highlighted in Sundays Courier. Specifically changes in election laws.

There should be national voting right’s laws; not those of each state many of which are just within constitutional rights but ethnically and economical restricting voting access. Two of the worst states are Texas, and North Carolina.

Another is the determination of voting districts in which states are able to make the election of Representatives and State officials safe for a particular party. New Jersey is one of the worst; the gerrymandering of Congressional districts has no logical geographic reason but will assure that our split of representatives in Congress will never change barring a complete collapse of one party.

The same is true of determining the makeup of the State Senate and Assembly. Our method of plotting voting districts evolves upon one person a so called independent. Such a person is beholden to both parties so status quo is operational mode.

Every 10 years there is a redrawing of entities for both national and state offices based on the census. Except when we lose a congressional seat there is little chance that an incumbent will be defeated.

This is also true in the separately devised state legislature districts.

The politicians have no desire to risk their livelihood; so it is unlikely that they will initiate any change. 

That is why there must be another change making in permissible and without difficulty for public originated proposition to appear on the ballot.

GREECE vs. CALLOWAY

Some have felt that the prayer offered at the start of the Council’s business meeting to be not only religiously offensive to some, but also irreverent.

Granted that the prayer has been changed from the very religious one offered years ago by members of the Council to one which is innocently considered to be non-sectarian but includes the phrase “in his name”.

The question is why any prayer? If the Councilors believe that they need Divine guidance in their deliberations and decisions; their record over the past years would suggest that in that respect there has been a complete lack of communication.

Moreover they were elected to use their intellect in coming to decisions that were best for the community; not to vote out of party or personal loyalty. There is no need for a third party input into their actions.

Yesterday the Supreme Court heard arguments in Greece v. Galloway, a case challenging the constitutionality of prayers before local government meetings. Greece is a community near Rochester NY opens its township meetings with a prayer offered by various Christian ministers in which the terms “Jesus”, “Christ”, “the Holy Spirit”, “and Our Savior” are used.

The plaintiffs claim that these sectarian prayers are a violation of the First Amendment. It is noted that in 1983 in Marsh v Chambers the Supreme Court ruled that “state funded prayers” before the Nebraska legislature were permissible. Also, both houses of Congress have chaplains. As we know their presence have been the keystone of our Congress’s effectiveness.

In June 2014 we should have a decision from the court.  

I for one regard both the flag pledge and prayer before the Council meetings a superfluous; but as long as neither is offensive; if it makes them happy so be it. 

A 100 YEARS

100 years ago this week 22 Jewish families united in forming a Reformed Jewish Congregation in Plainfield.

Temple Sholom’s first house of worship was a leased small chapel on Grove Street just over the bridge in North Plainfield.

 
In the mid-20s the congregation had become so large that a permanent edifice was opened on West 7^th St. For many years until after WWII it was the only Reformed Congregation west of Newark in central NJ.

In the late 50s the existing building with its class rooms was too small for worshipers on the High Holy Days and for several years the Paramount Theater was the site of those services.

In 1961 a large addition became the main sanctuary and social hall. In the late 70s there was a major expansion of the religious school’s facilities, despite the ongoing changes in the City’s demographics which had been initiated with school bussing and accelerated after the “Riots”.

Members of this congregation were the leaders in the Queen City’s eminence as a commercial center and professional services.

By 2001 it had become evident that the membership in the Plainfield 

Temple was declining as the local population was relocating and joining newer Congregations as in the Mountains; or the growing Westfield Temple and  the Plainfield location was no longer viable.

In 2003 the Fanwood Presbyterian Church has provide space for Temple Sholom’s worships, and Union Catholic School the class room space for its religious school.  

This August Temple Sholom began construction of its new sanctuary in Scotch Plains. It will be in its new facilities still serving the same general area during the beginning of its 2^nd century.

The West 7^th St building is now the site of a successful Charter School. The building is still serving Plainfield.

Tonight,Thursday, in the Plainfield Library there will be the opening of an extended exhibit of the history of the Temple and its membership’s involvement in the community.It should be of interest to all.

EARLY ELECTION RESULTS.

No real surprise in the election results in Plainfield; except perhaps in the BOE where Clarke came in 2nd and incumbent Moore edged out Melgar by 38 votes. The big surprise there was the overwhelming votes that Wilma Campbell received in her reelection.

Mapp's victory could be considered a mandate for responsible government.

Plainfield remained true to party line in the Governor's race. Perhaps we should try to woo him for something that will better our health care situation. 

All results are unofficial and there may be absentee ballots that could impact on the BOE election, but that is unlikely.