The Sipprelle-Holt Debate, #1

A replay of the debate between Scott Sipprelle and Rush Holt which was held yesterday at Rider University can be view by clicking here.

• Tweet

Pallone Staffer Harasses Little’s Videographer

• Tweet

LITTLE TO PALLONE: WHAT OTHER DECISIONS DID YOU TRY TO INFLUENCE BECAUSE SOMEBODY GAVE YOU CAMPAIGN CASH?

(HIGHLANDS, October 15) – Republican Congressional challenger Anna Little – continuing to highlight a report in The New York Times indicating that her opponent, 22-year incumbent Frank Pallone, worked to overturn a decision by the Food and Drug Administration after receiving campaign contributions from a medical device manufacturer whose device had been unanimously rejected on multiple occasions by FDA scientific reviewers – today called on Pallone to explain the exact nature of the transaction.

“Yesterday, The New York Times published a disturbing report about our Congressman, Frank Pallone, using his influence to get the FDA to approve a medical device after receiving campaign contributions from the device manufacturer,” said Little. “So yesterday, we challenged Rep. Pallone to tell us what OTHER federal government agencies he’s influenced on behalf of campaign contributors.

 “Today, we’d like to go back to the original transaction, and get some more detail from Mr. Pallone,” said Little.

 “Specifically, we’d like answers to the following questions:

“When you accepted your first contribution from an executive of the device manufacturer in December 2007, did you know then that he was hoping you would look favorably upon his request for help with the FDA? Put another way, was the campaign contribution — $2300, the maximum then allowed by law – the first you had heard of the device manufacturer and its problem with the FDA?

“If not – that is, if you knew of the device manufacturer’s problems with the FDA BEFORE you accepted the contribution – did you or anyone on your congressional or campaign staff (including fundraising consultants) indicate to the executive that his request would be far more likely to be given favorable consideration if it were accompanied by a contribution?

“If yes – that is, if you did NOT know of the device manufacturer’s problems with the FDA at the time you accepted the contribution – at what point, exactly, DID you become aware of the problems with the FDA? And at that point, did the fact that you had already accepted a contribution from an executive of the company raise any questions at all in your mind as to the propriety of offering assistance to a campaign contributor?

“The timing of the two contributions – the first, in December 2007, the second, in October 2008 – certainly seems interesting, given that the heavy lifting of the influence exerted by your office appears to have begun in December 2007. Would it be reasonable to draw the conclusion that the December 2007 contribution was an enticement to action, and the October 2008 contribution a ‘thank you’ for a job well done? If not, why not?

“We have many more questions for Mr. Pallone on this matter,” said Little. “But we don’t want to overtax him the way he overtaxes us. So we’ll just leave it here for now.

“Remember, you cannot change Washington without changing the people we send to Washington!”

Yesterday’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/health/policy/15fda.html?_r=2

Last year’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/health/policy/25knee.html

• Tweet

Weekend@Monmouth

Like clockwork, Greg Kelly has the calendar here.

Sunday evening is jam packed for the 6th congressional district:

At 5PM Governor Chris Christie, “America’s Governor” who is not running for President, will rally with Anna Little and her supporters at the American Legion in Piscataway.

Then at 7PM, Little will debate Frank Pallone at Temple Shalom in Aberdeen.

Do you think the announcement of the Christie rally had anything to do with Pallone agreeing to debate Little 2 hours later?  I do.

Do you think Governor Christie will attend the debate?  I hope he does, doubt he will, but it wouldn’t shock me.

• Tweet

Is The Entire NJ Mainstream Media In The Tank For Pallone?

By Art Gallagher

The FDA made an extraordinary and unprecedented move today when it announced that it was rescinding its 2008 approval of a medical device. The FDA said that the approval was made in error, after the product had already been rejected, based upon political pressure made by Congressman Frank Pallone and Steve Rothman as well as Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez.  All four knee jerks waged their campaign for the product’s approval by the FDA after receiving significant campaign contributions from the product’s manufacturer.

It’s pretty big news when a federal agency reverses itself and cites the inappropriate, if not illegal, actions of four federal legislators from the same state as the reason for their errant decision.  Don’t you think?   Some might say it is something of a scandal.  No?

The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Associated Press, Fox, The LA Times, TIME and many others thought it was newsworthy today.

Not so the NJ Media outlets.  The Star Ledger’s NJ.com has a difficult to find article on the matter, but their piece doesn’t mention Pallone, Rothman, Lautenberg or Menendez.

The APP and MyCentralJersey have nothing on it. The Associated Press, the news syndicate the APP and MyCentralJersey(the website for the Courier News and the Home News Tribute) get much of their news from,  published a the story, with the knee jerks named, at 4:30 this afternoon.

The Little Campaign issued at press release on the matter, questioning what else Pallone has sold his office for, at 5:05 this afternoon.

Maybe the story broke too late in the day for the Neptune Nudniks and their MyCentralJersey brethren and they will cover it tomorrow.  What’s the Star Ledger’s excuse from editing out Pallone, Rothman, Lautenberg and Menedez from the story? The Star Ledger subscribes to the Associated Press too.

My guess is that they are unfair and biased, i.e biased and pretending not to be.

UPDATE:  It has come to our attention that the APP has a reporter working on a story about Gerry Scharfenberger’s reverse 9-11 call about recycling, with a political rather than budgetary or environmental slant.  That’s a higher priority than Pallone selling his office and putting patients’ health at risk. 

• Tweet

LITTLE TO PALLONE: WHAT OTHER DECISIONS DID YOU TRY TO INFLUENCE BECAUSE SOMEBODY GAVE YOU CAMPAIGN CASH?

 (HIGHLANDS, October 14) – Republican Congressional challenger Anna Little – responding to a report in The New York Times indicating that her opponent, 22-year incumbent Frank Pallone, worked to overturn a decision by the Food and Drug Administration after receiving campaign contributions from a medical device manufacturer whose device had been unanimously rejected on multiple occasions by FDA scientific reviewers – today called on Pallone to tell his constituents what OTHER federal government decisions he has tried to influence on the basis of campaign contributions.

“Today The New York Times published a disturbing report about our Congressman, Frank Pallone, using his influence to get the FDA to approve a medical device after receiving campaign contributions from the device manufacturer,” said Little. “The device in question had been reviewed and rejected unanimously by FDA scientific reviewers over a number of years, according to a report issued by the FDA last year,” continued Little. “But under pressure from Frank Pallone and others, senior managers at the agency made a political decision to overturn the recommendation of their own reviewers.

“According to a report in The New York Times from last year, Rep. Pallone began making inquiries on behalf of the device manufacturer after receiving contributions to his campaign account — $2300 in December 2007 and another $1000 in October 2008 – from an executive of the device manufacturer. The inquiries began in December 2007.

“Here in New Jersey, especially, where we have long fought a corrupt political culture where ‘pay to play’ has been deeply embedded at the state and local level, it’s especially troubling to learn that our representatives in Washington apparently have been engaging in the same kind of activity.

“I don’t know which is worse – knowing that the FDA can be influenced by political pressures, or NOT knowing what other federal agency decisions Frank Pallone has tried to influence because a campaign donor asked him to. Perhaps Rep. Pallone can save us a lot of time and trouble by just telling us what other federal agency decisions he’s tried to influence based on his latest campaign needs?

“Remember, you cannot change Washington without changing the people we send to Washington!”

Today’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/15/health/policy/15fda.html?_r=2

Last year’s New York Times report: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/health/policy/25knee.html

• Tweet

NJ Restaurant Association Endorses Sipprelle for Congress

Princeton, October 14, 2010 – Calling incumbent politician Rush Holt “all wrong” on the economy, the New Jersey Restaurant Association has endorsed the congressional campaign of Scott Sipprelle in the 12th District, announced the Sipprelle campaign today.

“When you compare Rush Holt and Scott Sipprelle on the issues that matter to small businesses in New Jersey and the country, it’s simply no contest,” said Deborah Dowdell, President of the New Jersey Restaurant Association. “Scott Sipprelle is a successful businessman who knows that to fix our economy and create jobs we need to rein in federal spending and cut taxes for individuals and businesses. We need smaller government, not bigger government.”

“Rush Holt has certainly not been a friend to small businesses, and we look forward to seeing his political career come to a close on November 2nd,” added Dowdell.

“I am honored to have won the endorsement of a leading small business group like the NJRA,” said Sipprelle. “The cornerstone of my campaign has been a ‘Blueprint for Renewal’ that offers specific plans to create jobs, control spending, reduce debt, incentivize entrepreneurship and restore prosperity to America. I look forward to working with the NJRA and others who believe that we simply cannot spend our way out of this recession, and that we need a new direction in Washington.”

About the New Jersey Restaurant Association
The NJRA represents owners and operators of full-service restaurants, catering facilities, taverns & pubs, brew pubs, diner restaurants, hotel restaurants, coffee shops, limited & quick service restaurants, institutional feeders, delis, pizzerias, country clubs, culinary students and schools. Today, the New Jersey restaurant and hospitality industry includes 25,000 eating and drinking establishments generating over $12 billion in annual sales and employing 311,000 people. Visit www.NJRA.org.

• Tweet

Wayne’s World

• Tweet

Beyond the headlines, the truth about our jobs crisis

• Tweet

LITTLE: DOES PALLONE NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A TAX ‘CUT’ AND A TAX ‘HIKE?’ OR HIS HE DELIBERATELY TELLING UNTRUTHS?

(HIGHLANDS, October 14) – Republican Congressional challenger Anna Little – responding to publication of an analysis by Americans for Tax Reform of the 111th Congress’ record on tax cuts v. tax hikes – today asked if her opponent, 22-year incumbent Frank Pallone, understands the difference between a tax “cut” and a tax “increase.” 

“Its clear that Frank Pallone’s been in Washington too darn long,” said Little. “Apparently, he’s been there so long, voting for so many tax increases and so much more spending, that he’s now begun to confuse tax ‘cuts’ with tax ‘increases.’

 “On NJN’s ‘On the Record’ broadcast over the weekend, he said the current Congress has enacted more tax cuts than any other Congress.

 “Here’s his exact quote: ‘I mean, there’s been more tax cuts and efforts to try to, uh, uh, help businesses through tax credits or tax cuts in this Congress than in any other Congress.’

 “But Americans for Tax Reform – the nation’s leading tax reform group – just yesterday published an analysis that essentially says Frank Pallone doesn’t know what he’s talking about. According to the ATR analysis, the 111th Congress enacted tax cuts totaling $373.6 billion, of which just $107.6 billion is permanent tax relief.

 “Meanwhile, that same Congress enacted tax INCREASES totaling $725.7 billion, of which every single penny is permanent.

 “That’s a net tax HIKE of $352 billion enacted by the current Congress. So Frank Pallone’s insistence that this Congress has passed more tax cuts than any other Congress leads me to ask a simple question – does Frank Pallone not understand the difference between a tax ‘cut’ and a tax ‘increase,’ or he is just willfully telling an untruth?

 “Remember, you cannot change Washington without changing the people we send to Washington!”

 You can read the ATR analysis here: http://www.atr.org/final-tally-th-congress-obama-democrat-a5482

• Tweet