Yet, good news for Trenton Democrats—the NJ Republicans are trying to lose
By Art Gallagher
State Senator Barbara Buono, the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor, received two doses of bad news today (so far) for her fledgling campaign to unseat Governor Chris Christie in November.
1) A Quinnipiac poll released today indicates that Buono has made no progress over the last month in increasing her dismal name recognition. 78% of those polled don’t know enough about Buono to form an opinion. That compares to 79% last month. Of the few who recognize her name, 43% have an unfavorable opinion.
Christie’s numbers remain amazingly strong. 67% approve of the job he is doing as governor. 66% says he deserves to be reelected. In a head to head match up with Buono, Christie wins 58%-26%, with 13% out to lunch.
2) Even worse for Buono, PolitickerNJ reports that she is likely to be the only major party gubernatorial candidate in the history of New Jersey’s matching funds campaign program not to qualify for the maximum amount. PolitickerNJ said that Buono has raised only $29,000 per week since she declared her candidacy in December. In order to earn the maximum $2 million in state matching funds for the primary, she would have to raise $216,000 per week over the next six weeks of the primary campaign.
Christie has opted out of the state matching funds program and has raised upwards of $5 million to date for the primary.
Trenton Republicans Trying to Lose
With Chrisite’s polling and financial numbers so strong, one would think that the Trenton Democrats that control the legislature would be concerned about Christie coattails. Trenton Republicans seem enthused about the prospect of taking control of the legislature, but so far their campaign is deploying the stupidest strategy imaginable.
I’m not a professional political strategist, I just play one of the Internet. In my not so humble opinion the NJ GOP‘s campaign against Corzine Democrats is the dumbest political strategy since Christine O’Donnell declared she is not a witch.
Monmouth County Legislator Has A Message That Republicans Badly Need To Win
Gannett’s New Jersey newspapers and websites published a list of New Jersey’s political “Rising Stars” yesterday. The editorial says those on the list are young (most are under 40, all are under 50) politicos that are likely to emerge as the “next generation” of leaders on the regional or state levels of New Jersey government and politics.
Assemblywoman Caroline Casagrande is the only Monmouth County leader who made the top twelve of the list. As a three term Assemblywoman seeking her fourth term and the Assembly Minority’s Policy Co-Chair, one could argue that Casagrande is in the current generation of leadership. But at 36, her star is still very much “rising.”
If you are fortunate enough to talk to Casagrande about policy and politics, you will quickly realize that the real power of her ‘light’ is largely ‘hidden under a bushel.’
Bayshore Tea Party Group Co-Founders Bob Gordon and Barbara Gonzalez took to their Asbury Park Press blog yesterday to attempt to explain why they are challenging the 13th Legislative District and County Republican incumbents. In this post I’ll attempt to explain their explanation with the benefit of having spoken to them and having attended the meeting where they introduced most of their candidates. If I get any of it wrong, I suspect they will correct me in the comments.
Gordon and Gonzalez would probably object to the characterization that they are challenging the incumbents. They would say they are supporting the challenge, not doing the challenging. Just as senate candidate Leigh-Ann Bellew said she is not the BTPG’s candidate, but anticipates the group’s support. This a linguistic distinction without a practical difference. The challenge is a Tea Party challenge.
Assembly Republican Rob Clifton, R-Monmouth, Burlington, Middlesex and Ocean, said he believes it is appropriate for legislation approved by an Assembly committee last June that would allow voters to decide if judges should have the authority to deny bail to defendants deemed dangerous while awaiting trial, to be considered as part of Thursday’s Assembly voting session.
The legislation, ACR-153, was unanimously released by the Assembly Judiciary Committee, but has yet to receive consideration by the General Assembly. Under the resolution, a court must find that no amount of bail, pretrial release conditions, or combination of bail and pretrial release conditions would assure the defendant’s appearance as required or to protect the public safety.
The three major credit rating agencies affirmed the credit ratings of New Jersey’s bonds within the last week. Two of the three, Moody’s and Fitch affirmed the outlook for the State’s credit as stable. However, while affirming their AA- rating today, Standard and Poor’s lowered their outlook for New Jersey from stable to negative. S&P’s rationale for lowering their outlook is that they consider Governor Chris Christie’s revenue projections optimistic.
Democratic legislators, Assembly Budget Committee Chairman Vincent Prieto, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo and Assembly Majority Leader Lou Greenwald, a potential gubernatorial candidate next year, all jumped on the S&P outlook downgrade to score political points against Christie. The Statehouse Press Corp was happy to advance the negative spin.
Monmouth County’s Declan O’Scanlon, the Assembly Republican Budget Officer, fired back against the Democrats and the media for “crowing” about the S&P report while falling mute over the Fitch and Moody’s reports is a scathing statement:
“My Democrat colleagues are like vultures seeking to pounce on potential prey despite the fact that their appetite will not be satisfied by one agency’s outlook,” said O’Scanlon, R-Monmouth. “They are always ready to jump on what they perceive to be negative news and many in the media buy into their political theatrics. Instead of working with the governor and Republicans in the Legislature, they continue to wait for gloom and doom predictions.
“The conduct and glee from our leading legislative Democrats is remarkable and disturbing. For days, they sat silent when two ratings agencies affirmed New Jersey’s credit rating in response to the Schools Development Corporation bond offering and today are dancing in the streets when a third rating agency – after also maintaining the state’s credit rating – gave an outlier’s opinion and lowered its outlook,” explained O’Scanlon. “To see this kind of political opportunism and rooting for failure from individuals entrusted with some of the highest leadership positions our government offers is disgraceful. Their Swiss cheese, fragmented perception of reality – with the holes miraculously lining up with anything positive about our state’s fiscal condition – is disturbing, but not surprising.”
“That our Statehouse press corps simply gobbles the partisan nonsense up so willingly is also a real disappointment, stated O’Scanlon. “That is especially so when you see them blindly quoting even those lawmakers who so vigorously fought bipartisan pension and benefits reforms in an effort that would have crippled New Jersey’s long-term efforts to fix our long-term economic health.
“Had we followed the path of the very people now attacking the Governor the outlook for the state’s future would be dramatically worse. They cannot, with a straight face, criticize this Governor with any credibility,” said O’Scanlon. “It was this governor that has started to turn our state around – and he had to fight the very people now attacking him in order to do that. The governor and Republicans know we are in a difficult economy and these are risky times. But we are also not afraid to make tough decisions. Previous Democrat administrations talked about tough times, but never took action. Without taking decisive action to fix many of our state’s problems,New Jerseywould be in a financial abyss.
“The Democrats’ are selling a bill of goods to the public and the media which conveniently ignores their eight-year record of expanding government spending and want us to believe their distorted view of reality,” commented O’Scanlon. “We have more work to do in turning our state around, but I am much more confident entrusting our state’s future with the Christie administration than its Democratic predecessors.”
Never mind the 1% to 99% rhetoric that has worked its way into our lexicon since the Occupy movement moved into Zuccotti Park. With yesterday’s 3-2 decision that judges are exempt from New Jersey’s pension and health benefits reform, our State’s judiciary have declared themselves the .005%. They are the truly elite. The 400 of New Jersey’s 8.8 million citizens. They don’t have to share in the sacrifice.
As Governor Christie said in Atlantic City yesterday,
“What we did, the administration and the Legislature, was demand that everybody in public employment pay their fair share for the benefits they’re going to get like people in the private sector do every day. And I cannot believe that we’re going to permit one small sector of folks (to be exempt), who consider themselves special, and who by the way granted themselves this special treatment themselves. That doesn’t make any sense to me.’’
“If you’re a police officer, or a fire fighter, or a teacher in this state, and you’re paying more for your health benefits and your pension, I’ve got a feeling you’re pretty frosted if it turns out that a group of judges decides for the whole group of judges that they don’t have to pay their fair share.’’
Christie told NJ 101.5’s audience on his monthly Ask the Governor show last night that if the legislature puts a Constitutional Amendment on the ballot this fall, he will campaign for it. That will be the easiest campaign in the history of the world. There will likely be 3.9 million New Jerseyans voting on November 6. There are about 400 judges. If all of the judges got all of their family members and friends to vote against the Constitutional Amendment, would that add up to even 10,000 votes? I don’t think so.
As Senator Joe Kyrillos said yesterday, “Judicial independence does not mean judicial supremacy and exceptionalism.” If the legislature acts by August 6, and it looks as though they will, the people of New Jersey will be sending the Judicial branch an overwhelming reminder that they work for us. In America, even in New Jersey, the people are Sovereign. “All political power is inherent in the people.”
Even though there is not much time, the legislature should consider recommending other changes to Article VI, Section VI of the State Constitution to the people, since we’ll be making changes to the clause anyway.
Is seven years too long before a Judge is reviewed and reconfirmed? How about 3 or 4 years? Is tenure after 7 years, if reconfirmed, until mandatory retirement at age 70 still appropriate? How about a review and reconfirmation every 4, 5, or 7 years until retirement. When the retirement age of 70 for judges was affirmed by Constitutional Amendment in 1978, the average life expectancy in the United States was 73.5. Now, the average life expectancy is 78. Why not increase the mandatory retirement age to 75 or 80? How about establishing a voluntary retirement age before being eligible to collect a pension at 70. Those would create some pension savings.
The Judiciary has given the Legislature an opportunity to make substantive adjustments to the .005%’s superiority and exceptionalism.
As Governor Christie told a Town Hall meeting audience in Garfield on May 2, it is extraordinarily difficult to hold judges accountable in New Jersey. Now would be a good time to make some changes.
If you agree, contact your legislators and the governor. Pass this column on and ask others to do the same. Time is short.
A Monmouth University/Asbury Park Press poll released this morning indicates that Governor Christie’s approval numbers remain above 50% in New Jersey. 53% of registered voters approve of the job Christie is doing, compared to 35% that do not.
61% of Jersey voters think its a great idea that Mitt Romney tab Christie to give the keynote address at the Republican National Convention next month.
Christie has been promoting his bipartisan accomplishments in his out of state travels, but Jerseyans aren’t buying it. 31% of voters say that Christie and the Democratic leadership is working well together, 53% say they are not playing nice. 58% blame Christie and the Democrats equally.
The Democratic legislatures approval ratings remain in the tank, 35%-43%.
A majority of voters think it is wise to wait for state revenues to improve before cutting taxes.
Legislation that would give the Division of Youth and Family Services broad powers to prevent families from homeschooling their children is being fast tracked through the State Assembly.
The bill, A2881, was filed last Thursday and is scheduled for a hearing before the Assembly Women and Children Committee this morning. The Committee Chair, Assemblywoman Pamela Lampitt is sponsor of the bill.
Scott Woodruff, Senior Counsel of the Home School Legal Defense Association, says the legislation goes too far. He has asked that Lampitt postpone the hearing so that homeschool representatives can meet with her to discuss whether a narrow, more targeted bill can be drafted that would address legitimate needs without hampering parents homeschool program is not even in question. Lampitt has not responded.
Woodruff says that the bill gives DYFS “blank check power to prohibit homeschooling for any reason or no reason at all.”
DYFS has a history of making poor decisions about children in their
care. They should not be given blank-check authority to make
educational decisions about home schooled children.
Consider these situations which have nothing to do with education but
which might lead to a child coming under DYFS supervision:
–a child gets in a fight at the local park, and a judge gives DYFS
supervision of the child;
–a baby gets sick and a judge decides the family waited too long to
go to the emergency room, and places all the family’s other kids under
DYFS supervision;
–a family is remodelling and the house is so messy that a judge gives
DYFS suervision of the kids;
–a family with 6 biological children adopts a 10-year old orphan from
Russia who starts makes up bizarre stories about maltreatment, and a
judge gives DYFS supervision over all kids as a result.
This bill is probably unnecessary. If a judge ever actually takes
jurisdiction of a child, which usually happens in serious cases, the
judge probably already has the power to make decisions about the
child’s education.
This bill may make people afraid to accept services from DYFS.
The bill provides no definition of “care, custody or supervision,” so
we don’t even know for sure what situations would cause a family to
come under DYFS’ power to prohibit homeschooling. Nor does the bill
define “homeschool.” This could allow a judge power to define
homeschooling in a way that threatens the freedom of families.
The bill gives the Department of Education power to create regulations
to carry out the bill’s provisions. Regulations are created by the
will of bureacrats, not by a democratic process. Because of this, they
can be hostile to the rights of individuals.
The bill’s language starts by saying “notwithstanding any provision of
law to the contrary, …” This means that all other state laws must
give way to this new billl. Every other right you have under state law
will be below this bill.
The members of the Assembly Women and Children Committee are:
Chair:Pamela R. Lampitt (D) District 6 Voorhees 856.435.1247
A former Long Branch woman who appealed to Governor Chris Christie for help regarding unfair and illegal treatment by the Monmouth County Judge presiding over her divorce case says she has heard from the State Attorney General’s Criminal Division and the Governor’s office who have referred her case to the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct.
Rachel Alintoff, 36, told Christie during his town hall meeting in Garfield last week that Judge Paul X. Escandon stripped her of her parental rights of her 2 year old son, Hayden, without the legally required hearing, as punishment for her seeking an order of protection in New York, where she lives now, against her estranged husband Bryan who failed to dispose of a handgun as Escandon had ordered as part of a custody order.
Alintoff also told Christie that Escandon, after his ruling on her parental rights was overturned by the Appeals Court, denied her access to her clothing, money for legal fees and granted her only $1,100 per month in child support from her husband who earns, she says, over $500K per year on Wall Street.
Here’s a link to video of Alintoff speaking to Christie and the Governor’s response. The video will start with Christie recognising Alintoff. At the 43:58 mark Christie moves on to Peter, the young student who became famous for asking the Governor for a note to excuse him for missing school.
Here’s the text of Alintoff’s remarks and questions to Christie:
I am going through a divorce in Monmouth County in front of Judge Paul X. Escandon.
In October 2011, Judge Escandon stripped me of all my parental rights to my 2 year old son without the legally required hearing.
I had only supervised visitation. This was a punishment for an order of protection I was seeking in NYC (where I am currently living) when my husband failed to dispose of his handgun as per a court order. My son had to endure a month of barely seeing his mother until Judge Escandon was Summarily reversed by the Appelate Court for his illegal ruling.
Since then, Judge Escandon has gone on to make other illegal rulings against me such as denying me access to my clothing, granting no money for my legal fees and only issuing $1,100 in support a month to my son and me which puts us below the Federal Poverty Level. All while my husband makes on average over half a million dollars a year on Wall Street.
This is not an isolated incident. Judge Escandon has done similar things to other woman and has a habit of financiallly ruining women in his courtroom.
I have a 2-part question:
1) What will you do as Governor to ensure that Judges like Escandon follow the law or are taken off the bench?
2) Judge Escandon is the former law partner of Assemblyman Sean Kean whose main platform is reducing Alimony for women.
What will you do as Governor to make sure that Judges are kept from carrying out their own political agendas from the bench?
Alintoff, who first brought her situation to MMM’s attention as a comment in the post about the Garfield town hall meeting, says she’s heard from Jeanne Ashmore in the Governor’s Office and Detective Charles Crescenz in the Criminal Division of the Attorney General’s Office, both of whom told her the matter would be taken up by the Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct. Neither Crescenz nor Ashmore would comment to MMM. John Tonelli, Executive Director of the ACJC also declined to comment.
Alintoff emailed every member of the State Legislature today to inform them of her situation. Her father, Merny Schwartz, Phd, wrote to Chief Justice Stuart Rabner about Escandon’s conduct last December. Schwartz maintains a blog on his daughter’s case before Escandon, JudgePaulEscandon.blog.com.
If you want to understand what rule by liberal judges looks like on the state level, you need only look at New Jersey, which is teetering on bankruptcy though it remains one of America’s wealthiest states. ~ Steven Malanga, writing in City Journal
If you want to understand how, despite being one of the wealthiest states in the country, New Jersey is teetering on the brink of fiscal disaster, read Steven Malanga’s The Court That Broke New Jersey.
If you want to know why no governor or state legislature can reduce New Jersey’s oppressive property taxes, read Steven Malanga’s The Court That Broke New Jersey.
Malanga traces the roots of New Jersey’s tyranical Supreme Court all the way back to Arthur Vanderbilt, the first Chief Justice under the 1947 state constitution. In his opinion in Winberry v. Salisbury, Vanderbilt layed the foundation for judicial tyrnany by ruling that the court, not the legislature, has the power to make rules for the state judiciary.
That ruling set New Jersey’s judiciary apart from the court systems in most other states—as well as from the federal judiciary, which ultimately derives its authority from Congress. Some critics have even argued that Winberry violates the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee that every state must have a republican form of government. “Under the doctrine of Winberry v. Salisbury,” wrote New Jersey lawyer Anthony Kearns in a 1955 ABA Journal article, “we can only conclude that laws of practice and procedure are exclusively in the hands of men who are not elected.”
Malanga clearly lays out how New Jersey’s Supreme Court has taken over the state’s education policy and funding with no improvement in urban education to show for the $40 billion that has been wasted as a result of the Abbott decisions. He lays out the history of how the court usurped local zoning power with the Mt. Laurel decisions and COAH. He connects the dots in explaining how those two extra-constitutional power grabs have resulted in massive wealth redistribution, with no societal benefit, and an oppressive system of goverments.
Malanga stressed the importance of Christie’s promise to reshape the court with judges who will interpret the constitution rather than relating to it as a “living document.” However, he is not optimistic because of “…a Democrat-controlled legislature that’s often happy to dodge responsibility for heavy spending by letting the court mandate it.”
Hat tip to InTheLobby for bring this important article to our attention.
State Senator Barbara Buono, the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor, received two doses of bad news today (so far) for her fledgling campaign to unseat Governor Chris Christie in November.
