Hey, we never called the Governor a prick…

By Dan Jacobson, Originally published in the July 7 edition of the triCityNews

And people object to the language in this newspaper? Turns out we’re not so out of line.

Check out Democratic Senate President Steve Sweeney ripping into Republican Governor Chris Christie last weekend – in a front page story in the Star-Ledger, the biggest newspaper in the state:

 He’s mean-spirited. He’s angry. If you don’t like what he says, I liken it to being spoiled…(it’s) I’m going to get my way, or else. He’s a rotten prick.

Hilarious.

After all, only a few days before the two stood together at the signing of the controversial pension reform bill. They called each other friends and partners. The Governor hailed this bipartisan cooperation as a national model.

So much for that! Days later Christie vetoed the Democratic budget – and used his power to unilaterally reduce budget items, including funds for some pretty vulnerable people. Sweeney said it was political retaliation against those opposing the Governor:

This is all about him being a bully and a punk. I wanted to punch him in the head…To prove a point to me – a guy who has stood side by side with him, and made tough decisions – for him to punish people to prove a political point? He’s just a rotten bastard to do what he did.

Listen, you can punch me in the face and knock me down, do what you want. But don’t be vindictive and punish innocent people. These people didn’t do anything to him. It’s like a bank robber taking hostages. And now he’s starting to shoot people.

I liken it to being spoiled…He’s just a cruel man.

Hey, even we’ve never used the word “prick” in these pages. (Probably because we never thought of it.) But now that the Star-Ledger says it’s OK, well, let’s face it: Governor Christie can be a prick.

Not that he isn’t right most of the time on economic issues. I’d vote for the pension and benefits reform bill. But there’s just something about the guy I never liked. It’s just a visceral reaction. Of course, no way was I going to vote for that prick Jon Corzine in the last election. What a buffoon. So I voted for Independent Chris Daggett, who may or may not be a prick.

Anyway, I’m running for the state Assembly this year as an Independent. I have a strong libertarian streak on economics and social issues. And I have no interest in being a politician or acting like one. Way too cheesy. I’d simply want to do the job of an Assemblyman. Imagine that.

But if elected, there’s one huge perk I’m going to milk for all it’s worth: The entertainment value of being down in Trenton with all these clowns. It would be outrageous. Just fantastic. I couldn’t help but insert myself right into the middle of it. Who could resist such centrifugal forces of absurdity? And to own a newspaper and be able to write about it all the time! I’m sorry, you people have got to elect me. You’ve got to!

I first went to Trenton in 1984 as an aide to then state Senator Frank Pallone. I got elected to the state Assembly as a Democrat at age 28 and served a term in 1990-91. Even had a physical altercation with the Assembly Speaker, who was a member of my own party, after I led a revolt on a controversial education funding bill. So I’ve seen some action real up close and personal down there. Pretty wild stuff.

But I never saw anything like the drama unfolding between Sweeney and Christie. And the set design in the background is just fabulous: The Democratic Party imploding – tearing itself up as Democratic leaders like Sweeney sided with the Governor on pension and benefit reform, while lower ranking Democratic legislators bitterly blasted their own leadership to suck up to their union sponsors. And now suddenly – out of nowhere – Sweeney and Christie are in a steel caged wrestling match.

What a spectacle! Man, give Governor Christie credit for choreographing the whole show. It’s brilliant. After Democratic leaders stuck their necks out for him on pension and benefit reform – giving him even greater national prominence – the Governor turned on them just days later when he blasted their proposed budget. What treachery.

What a prick!

Of course, Christie was completely right in his comments. But he’s still a prick:

The proposed budget from the Democrats is just more of the same unrealistic, pie in the sky, fantasy budgeting they brought to New Jersey for the eight years before we arrived.  Instead of continuing to put New Jersey on strong fiscal footing, this proposal reaffirms the Democrats’ commitment to job-killing tax increases and an unrepentant addiction to spending. New Jerseyans are the most over-taxed citizens in America and they want us to reduce spending and make government smaller.  This proposal only serves to denigrate all of the hard choices made over the last year that broke from decades of state government spending money that just doesn’t exist.

Got to say, the level of our political discourse has sunk to new lows with the publication of that Sunday front page Star-Ledger article – with the most powerful Democrat in Trenton calling our Republican Governor “a rotten prick.”

If elected, I promise that you won’t see this Publisher use such language in the state capitol. I’d use it in these pages, of course. But not while walking around in my official capacity as a state Assemblyman.

Then again, I’d tell a reporter that something is bullshit. Although I wouldn’t call any other elected officials assholes. Certainly not “rotten pricks”.

You know, I got to think this through now that the Star-Ledger has totally changed the rules. Got to make sure we keep our standards current so people know what’s acceptable behavior.

After all, we’re the triCityNews. We’re here to help.

(The 11^th District where I’m running includes: Asbury Park, Long Branch, Red Bank, Ocean Township, Neptune, Neptune City, Interlaken, Deal, Allenhurst, Loch Arbour, West Long Branch, Eatontown, Shrewsbury Borough, Shrewsbury Township, Tinton Falls, Colts Neck, Freehold Township and Freehold Borough.)

• Tweet

Jennifer Beck and same sex marriage

By Dan Jacobson, originally published in the June 30th edition of the triCityNews

Time for Jennifer Beck to face the music on same sex marriage. And the recently-engaged Republican Senator will soon have a lot of explaining to do.

With New York voting for marriage equality, the focus will shift to New Jersey where our state Senate voted down same sex marriage two years ago.

Beck, to her shame, voted against it. And all 16 Republican Senators in office today oppose marriage equality.

Of course, it’s politics. Republicans must appease their right wing on social issues – just as Democrats must do with their left wing on economic issues. That’s what pisses everyone off. The total bullshit of it all. You can’t tell me 100 percent of those Senate Republicans in Trenton personally oppose marriage equality.

And no way does Beck, despite her vote.

Jennifer kept her mouth shut during the floor debate on the issue. And her letter to constituents explaining her vote never stated she personally opposed marriage equality – only that she voted according to the sentiment of her legislative district.  

Well, the Senator now has a new district with new constituents. She’s in the newly gerrymandered 11^thDistrict, which for the first time includes Red Bank, Long Branch and Asbury Park. I call it the triCity district. (I’m running in the same district as an Independent for state Assembly.) The 11th District also includes Ocean Township, Neptune and Ocean Grove, among other places.

Suddenly, Senator Beck has a sizeable gay and lesbian population among her constituents. Probably the largest in any legislative district in the state. So this ought to be interesting. After all, in Jennifer’s world the moral issue of same sex marriage is decided by what’s best to do politically. Or in the language of politicians: “Representing the will of my constituents.” So what will she do now?

As Beck spends more time in Asbury Park and Ocean Grove, and other places in her new district with a gay population, she’ll feel like a total fool. There is no way this otherwise progressive Republican woman – she’s also pro-choice – is personally opposed to marriage equality. No way. And everyone knows it.

So consider this. If a politician doesn’t have the guts to vote what they believe on a moral issue – remember we’re talking about issues of morality here – how can we ever expect them to do the right thing on anything else?

Obviously, marriage equality isn’t the most important issue facing the state government – it’s all economic issues right now – but I’ve always considered it a big deal. It’s outrageous that there still exists such bigotry against my friends and neighbors here in Asbury Park, and that politicians are afraid to stand up to it. And it says so much about those we elect.

Lots of readers know that Beck and I are long-time close friends. And the triCityNews has backed her since she was unknown and unelected and taking on the Democratic machine up in Red Bank. That’s where she made her name. So when I win my Assembly race in November, the two of us will be spending lots of time together. Driving to Trenton, going to local events, meeting on issues of concern to the 11^th District.

And I will hound her every second until she changes her position on the marriage equality issue. Because it’s a complete joke – really a disgrace – to watch her stand there and say she will vote against it again. I’m not buying it for one second. And friends don’t let friends make asses of themselves.

So Beck might as well get it over with and change her stance now. She’s not going to lose this election in November, and the next one is four years away. Her only vulnerability would be in a GOP primary against a right-wing social conservative. And even that she’d win in this moderate district.

Then again, if Beck lost a Republican primary because of supporting marriage equality, so what? It’s the right thing to do. You don’t play games on moral issues. Or else you’ll end up looking like those southern bigots of the 1960s who opposed interracial marriage.

That will be Beck’s legacy if she sticks with this position. Bet most of those clowns opposing interracial marriage didn’t care either way – hey, it was just politics. Like Beck is doing today. If she doesn’t switch her position soon in her new district, this issue will haunt her down the road. As it should. Better to do it sooner than later, when it would look like she was just trying to avoid the issue until it comes up again for a vote.

A special mention is due here to Republican Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini, who is Beck’s running mate and the only Republican in Trenton I know who supports marriage equality. I’ve long saluted Mary Pat in these pages for taking that stand. What a great reflection of great character on her part.

Interestingly, in the contest for the two Assembly seats in the 11^thDistrict, four of the five candidates – Mary Pat, myself and Democrats Marilyn Schlossbach and Vin Gopal – all support same sex marriage. So does Beck’s Democratic opponent Raymond Santiago.

Jennifer’s conduct on this issue has been disgusting long enough. It’s time to end it. She’d be the first Republican in the current state Senate to change her stand, and do what’s right. Jennifer would join Mary Pat Angelini as a leader in the Republican Party on this issue.

Of course, we’d be happy to make these pages available for Beck’s announcement supporting marriage equality. There’s no better venue for Jennifer to set everything right.  

After all, we’re the triCityNews. We’re here to help.

(The new 11^thDistrict – where everyone mentioned in this article is running – includes Asbury Park, Long Branch, Red Bank, Ocean Township, Neptune, Neptune City, Interlaken, Deal, Allenhurst, Loch Arbour, West Long Branch, Eatontown, Shrewsbury Borough, Shrewsbury Township, Tinton Falls, Colts Neck, Freehold Township and Freehold Borough.)

Editors note:  As Dan Jacobson appears to be submitting his triCityNews publisher’s column to MMM on a weekly basis, this is a good time to remind readers and writers that all are welcome to submit material to MMM.  It has always been that way but is worth repeating.  Send your stuff to artvg @ aol .com

• Tweet

Pension crisis and my Asbury Park Press endorsement

By Dan Jacobson

So I’m running as an Independent for the state Assembly. And I can’t wait to face the Asbury Park Press editorial board for the endorsement interview.

That ought to be interesting. I’ve been blasting them as hypocrites of the first order for over a decade. I also call them assholes whenever necessary. They deserve it.

Yet on the most important issue facing our state government – the $120 billion shortfall needed to pay pension and retiree health benefits – suddenly the Asbury Park Press has eerily followed the triCity line.

In other words, I look forward to their endorsement.

From my column last week:

Any day now, you’ll see our Republican Governor and Democratic legislative leaders announce a deal to “reform” our state pension system.

Don’t believe it. This is a problem requiring 20 years of fiscal discipline. These people can’t see beyond the next election in 20 weeks….

So when you see our Republican Governor and Democratic legislative leaders announce some deal to address this problem, remember this: It’s all about the election in five months when the Senate and Assembly are up for grabs. It’s not a permanent deal. It can always be reversed or changed later…

Sure, they’ll make some progress with their deal – just enough to con you to think something is getting done. But not on a scale that really solves this problem. There’s not enough political upside and way too much political downside.

Indeed, the next day such a deal was announced. Three days later, the Press ran a front page article on the agreement entitled “Experts: Reforms not Enough”.

A better headline would have been “Jacobson was right”. Here’s the Press:

Government workers are white-hot angry over a proposal to make them pay more for their pensions and health care.

But with the state now facing a $120 billion long-term cost for the unfunded portion of pensions and retiree health benefits, experts say that the measure, expected to be voted in the full state Senate on Monday, does not go far enough.

“It’s a healthy modest bipartisan step, but it doesn’t deal with a lot of the major problems,” said Michael Riccards of the Hall Institute, a nonpartisan think tank that specializes in state issues. “I see a lot of it as postponement.”

Jeremy Gold, a New York-based actuary consultant who reviewed the pension and benefit reform proposal for New Jersey Press Media, agreed. “Any step in the right direction, I don’t want to be too harsh about,” Gold said. “But they are a long way from solving their problems.”

…(E)xperts see flaws in the package. Riccards, who has written extensively about the pension and benefit problems, said the state has yet to deal with the high cost of health care, such as the price of drugs, especially common drugs such as antibiotics.

He also noted that the state must still pay for retirees’ medical care out of the annual budget. In tough economic times, that could be a problem, Riccards said.

Gold said he takes issue with how the funding levels of the pension funds are calculated and said government rules over public pensions are too lax.

Tell you what. I was certain the Press would fall for the hype and cover the bipartisan “reform” as if it solves this catastrophic $120 billion crisis. They’re usually pretty clueless. To my shock, they got it right.

As did I.

Hell, I didn’t even have to see the so-called reforms beforehand. I knew what was coming.

(Sure, I’d vote for this bipartisan deal – it’s better than doing nothing. But I wouldn’t brag about how great it is, as you’ll now see the Governor and some Democratic leaders do as they compete for votes this November. The experts interviewed by the Press had it right: This is only a modest bipartisan start – the tough stuff still remains. Why am I not shocked?)

OK, so now what?

The elected officials are utterly incapable of dealing with something of this magnitude: The proposed state budget for this year is only $29 billion compared to the $120 billion gap we face on pensions and retiree health care.

My framework for a solution? Ripping the problem away from the politicians. I see no other way out.

I’d advocate a constitutional amendment – approved by the voters – establishing an independent Board of Trustees to oversee the pension and retiree health benefits system. They’d calculate the true amount necessary to make the system solvent – and take it out of the Treasury every year.

No cheating on figures. No cheating on the funding. Remember that the pension system has been underfunded for over 15 years. The politicians spent that money elsewhere. Just like what happened with Social Security on the federal level for the past 20 years. But in the end, we’re all responsible for this debacle. We elected these people.

The problem of pension and retiree health benefits in New Jersey can’t be solved without spreading the pain among everyone in our state. And the sooner we get to it the better. Otherwise, this debt will destroy us – and you’ll see the streets of Trenton looking like Athens, complete with the tear gas and rioting. What a nice image of New Jersey as a place to live and locate your business.

The constitutional amendment I envision would empower the independent Board of Trustees to draw up a rescue plan with the directive to seek equity in the sacrifice of the populace. That means benefit cuts to workers already retired and who will retire. And new revenue from taxes. The Amendment would specifically require both. You can’t do it any other way. Any politician telling you otherwise is lying. If you want to keep buying the bullshit, go ahead. It’s worked great so far.

Remember this: The more you spread around the sacrifice, the less of a burden it is on everyone individually. But you can never pull that off in the political system. That’s why I’d have the Pension Trustees do it for us. Of course, their rescue plan would require voter approval. You got to have that to raise taxes and cut benefits in this fashion.  

If voters reject their rescue plan, the Trustees would still take what’s needed each year from the state Treasury to fund the system. No more putting off Judgment Day. And then the three ring circus – the Governor, the Senate and the Assembly – can figure out how to pay for it. That ought to be one hell of a show.

In my proposal, I’d have the Board of Trustees appointed to staggered and lengthy terms by the Governor with the approval of the state Senate. They’d be barred from political activity, and would have no past connections to unions for a decade if not more.

The concept is to get a group of our state’s best talent to tell us the truth, and present us a plan made in good faith to deal with this issue. In the end, we make the call. If the Trustees get too political, or go too far off the rails, the voters would reject it. Anyone got a better idea?

An independent Board of Trustees sounds reasonable to me. Which means it will never happen. But in the unlikely event I get elected to the Assembly – only one Independent has done so in 50 years – at least someone will stand up and speak the truth about this explosive problem.

Just like I did in this space last week – as the Asbury Park Press most unexpectedly confirmed a few days later.

Man, this campaign is already getting awfully weird, and it’s only been three weeks.

(The 11^th District where I’m running includes: Asbury Park, Long Branch, Red Bank, Ocean Township, Neptune, Neptune City, Interlaken, Deal, Allenhurst, Loch Arbour, West Long Branch, Eatontown, Shrewsbury Borough, Shrewsbury Township, Tinton Falls, Colts Neck, Freehold Township and Freehold Borough.)

• Tweet

Pension crisis! Tear gas over Trenton…

Editors note: The following column by Dan Jacobson was originally published in the June 16, 2011 edition of the triCityNews.  It was written before the recent agreement of pension and health care reform struck by Governor Christie, Senate President Sweeney and Assembly Speaker Oliver.

By Dan Jacobson

Any day now, you’ll see our Republican Governor and Democratic legislative leaders announce a deal to “reform” our state pension system.

Don’t believe it. This is a problem requiring 20 years of fiscal discipline. These people can’t see beyond the next election in 20 weeks.

Our state government is $121 billion short of what’s needed to pay projected pension and retiree health benefits. How bad is it? This year’s proposed state budget is only $29.4 billion.

In other words, we’re bankrupt.

Remember the rioting in Greece last year? You bet there could be tear gas over Trenton if this isn’t fixed. And I’m not optimistic.

Last week, I announced I’m running for the state Assembly as an Independent. So let me piss off everyone by outlining what needs to be done. And it’s ugly. No way around it.

First, this problem must be ripped away from the politicians. I’d propose a state constitutional amendment – requiring voter approval – to establish an independent Board of Trustees to administer the pension and retirement health benefits system.

Each year, these independent Trustees would recalculate the total projected shortfall the state faces. No fudging the numbers by politicians. And the Board of Trustees would develop and oversee a long-term plan to restore the system – and thus the state’s finances – to solvency.

In addition, the Board would determine the annual contribution to the system – and it would have to be paid by the state. The elected officials have underfunded it for 15 years. With a constitutional amendment, that would end. No more cheating. We’d pay what’s needed to fix the problem.

And the Board of Trustees would be empowered to do what the politicians can’t: Set up a plan of benefit cuts and tax increases to fix the system by spreading the pain as widely as possible. And the wider it’s spread, the less it hurts everyone individually. Everyone has got to take a hit. We’re all in this mess together.

By the way, those benefit cuts would affect current and future retires already in the system. There’s no other way to do it. Elected officials only talk about changing the benefits for new employees. That’s not enough. So I envision everyone equally screaming – taxpayers, retirees, future retirees – when the Trustees propose a plan to fix this mess. Ironically, that way you know it’s fair.

But this is not a dictatorship. The rescue plan from the Board of Trustees would be submitted for voter approval.

If voters reject it, the Pension Trustees would simply take what’s needed every year from the state Treasury to ensure the system’s solvency. In that scenario, the three-ring circus in the State House – the Governor, the Assembly and the Senate – would figure out how to pay that annual bill. Of course, that will be a mess. But the bill would be paid. No more underfunding the system. No more postponing Judgment Day. I’d rather face it on our terms.

There you have it. That’s the basic outlines of my proposal. Here’s some more details:

The Board of Pension Trustees would be non-political like Judges. They’d be appointed by the Governor with the consent of the state Senate. None would have business or financial connection to unions for at least a decade, if not more. They’d have long and staggered terms as Trustees to minimize political interference.

And in putting together a rescue plan, their directive in the constitutional amendment would be quite specific: To implement a mix of both benefit cuts and tax increases – and it would specifically require both – to spread the burden as equitably as possible across all the citizens of this state.

Sure, that would require subjective judgments. There’s no mathematical formula to achieve this. But at least a rescue plan by the Trustees would be made in good faith by non-political appointees – not politicians seeking reelection. And voters would have the final say.

In other words, we’d face this problem like adults. We’d empower an independent group of people to tell us the truth. And propose a solution for us to consider. We’d then make the final call in a statewide vote.

Sure sounds better than tear gas canisters fired at protestors when a bankrupt state can’t pay its bills – and people become more outraged than anything we’ve ever seen in New Jersey.

But maybe all is not lost. Take the sentiment of retired state worker Vincent Lobascio, 85. He’s ready to sacrifice some of his benefits. Let’s hope most other citizens share his views – or we’re done.

“I’m willing to make my contribution, and I’m a retired guy,” the World War II combat veteran told the Asbury Park Press in a story about the pension crisis. “But don’t kill me.”

I’m with Mr. Lobascio. This 49 year-old taxpayer would pay more to solve this mess – just don’t kill me either. We’re all adults. We all know something must be done. Just spread that burden around as widely as possible. In the end, the solution is likely reasonable.

But politicians can’t do that because they’re competing for the support of blocs of voters – whether liberal union members or anti-tax conservatives. It’s all about getting elected. In fact, both those voter blocs I just mentioned will be outraged at this column.

Oh well. So I’ll get to remain a private citizen. Wow, what a tragedy.

So when you see our Republican Governor and Democratic legislative leaders announce some deal to address this problem, remember this: It’s all about the election in five months when the Senate and Assembly are up for grabs. It’s not a permanent deal. It can always be reversed or changed later. And you bet that will happen when the economy starts to do better and no one is paying attention.

Sure, they’ll make some progress with their deal – just enough to con you to think something is getting done. But not on a scale that really solves this problem. There’s not enough political upside and way too much political downside. The state has never faced a challenge this big. Plus, I don’t believe any figures or estimates these clowns throw around. They’re all biased toward getting reelected.

But a constitutional amendment empowering an independent Board of Trustees goes a long way toward eliminating political mischief.

And in my proposal, we’d even get to vote on any rescue plans from the Trustees. If they want to modify a rescue plan later, we’d all vote on that too. If any plan is rejected, the state would still fully fund the retirement system every year and stop the cheating.  Imagine how different everything would be if that was done for the past 15 years.

Hey, such a constitutional amendment sounds reasonable to me. That means it doesn’t have a chance in Trenton.

So in the most unlikely event I get elected to the Assembly – only one Independent has done so in 50 years – at least there’d be one person down there speaking the truth about the most dangerous problem this state has ever faced.

(The 11^th District where I’m running includes: Asbury Park, Long Branch, Red Bank, Ocean Township, Neptune, Neptune City, Interlaken, Deal, Allenhurst, Loch Arbour, West Long Branch, Eatontown, Shrewsbury Borough, Shrewsbury Township, Tinton Falls, Colts Neck, Freehold Township and Freehold Borough.)

• Tweet

Democrats Welcome Jacobson Into 11th District Assembly Race

The following is a statement from District 11 Assembly candidates Marilyn Schlossbach and Vin Gopal on Dan Jacobson’s entrance to the 11th District race:

“We have both known Dan for quite some time and we appreciated him personally reaching out to both of us to give us a heads up that he would be running. We believe more people should run for public office and we welcome Dan to the race. This is a representative democracy and the voters, after examining all the candidates running, will have to make an educated decision on whom they believe will be best to represent the 11th Legislative District.”

• Tweet

Jacobson files for Assembly In The 11th

By Art Gallagher

Former Democratic Assemblyman and tri-CityNews publisher Dan Jacobson has filed his petition to run for Assembly in the 11th legislative district as an Independent.

Jacobson’s candidacy creates a five way race for two Assembly seats.  The Republican candidates are incumbents Caroline Casagrande and Mary Pat Angelini.  The Democratic candidates are restaurateur Marilyn Schlossbach and publisher Vin Gopal.

Jacobson said told MMM that his candidacy is not a reflection upon his opponents, but on the process.  “Legislative elections in Monmouth County are stale and rarely competitive,” said Jacobson, “this is an opportunity for me to say my peace in a way that most candidates can’t because they are beholden to their party and special interests.  If I can do that and perhaps make the race more interesting and competitive, that in itself will be a public service.”

Jacobson considers himself a Libertarian on economic and social issues.  He said economic issues are paramount in this race. School vouchers are an example of where he thinks both parties have failed the public.

“What is an more important issue for the poor than educating their children? When I was last ran for the Assembly in 1993 I advocated starting a voucher program in the urban districts and then phasing them in throughout the state.  Since then the Republicans have had control and the Democrats have had control and there has been no improvement with how we educate our kids.”

Public employees unions are another area of government that Jacobson wants to reform.   “It is wrong that unions are collecting mandatory dues from our public employees and using that money for political purposes. Unions should set up PACs and let their members contribute voluntarily is they so choose.”

Of his opponents, only Angelini returned a call for comment.  “Dan is a friend.  I welcome him into the race and look forward to hearing his take on the issues,” said Angelini, ” I think there will be many common themes between us.”

 “I don’t understand why he is doing this,” said Monmouth County Democratic Chairman Vic Scudiery, “Dan should worry about his newspaper.”  Scudiery was chairman when Jacobson last served in the Assembly.

Jacobson filed 77 signatures with his petition.  He said he was told that 50 are required.

• Tweet

Jacobson Said To Be Running For Assembly In The 11th

By Art Gallagher

Sources within the Monmouth County Democratic Organization have told MMM  that former Democratic Assemblyman and tri-City News publisher Dan Jacobson is running for Assembly in the 11th legislative district as a third party candidate.

Jacobson declined to comment.  What a kitten.  KITTEN, KITTEN, KITTEN!

Jacobson, who served in the Assembly as a Democrat in 1990 and 1991, switched his party affiliation to Republican last March in order to challenge 11th district Senator Sean Kean in the Republican primary.  When Kean was moved into the 30th district with the new legislative map, Jacobson declined to run in the Republican primary for either Senate or Assembly.  At the time, Jacobson told MMM “it doesn’t feel right, I like the incumbents.  It wouldn’t be like challenging Sean Kean.”

If he runs, Jacobson would be challenging Republican incumbents Mary Pat Angelini and Caroline Casagrande and Democratic challengers Vin Gopal and Marilyn Schlossbach.

As an anti-government worker union fiscal hawk, Jacobson could draw votes from the Republicans.  As a strong supporter of gay marriage…the issue that prompted him to consider a challenge to Kean…he could draw votes from the Democrats.

Which side do you think a Jacobson candidacy would help and hurt?  Could he possibly win?   Please tell us in the comments.

• Tweet

Correction: Mary Pat Angelini Is Pro-Life

By Art Gallagher

In the Something For Dan Jacobson To Consider While Mulling An Assembly Bid piece posted on Saturday we reported that triCityNews publisher Dan Jacobson was considering a challenge to Caroline Casagrande in the 11th district GOP Assembly primary and not Mary Pat Angelini:

The potty mouth pundit says he supports incumbent Mary Pat Angelini, in large measure due to her pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage positions and that he is considering a challenge to Caroline Casagrande.

In his publisher’s message last week Jacobson said he supported Angelini because she was pro-choice and pro-gay marriage.

MMM has learned that Angelini is pro-life and that she voted against restoring Planned Parenthood’s funding that was cut from the state budget last year.  We regret the error and promise to fact check the triCityNews in the future.

• Tweet

Jacobson Not Running For Assembly In GOP 11th Primary

By Art Gallagher

triCityNews publisher Dan Jacobson told MoreMonmouthMusings that he will not be a candidate for Assembly in 11th district Republican primary because, “it just doesn’t feel right.”   “I like both incumbents,” Jacobson said of Assemblywoman Mary Pat Angelini and Caroline Cassagrande,  “it wouldn’t be like challenging Sean Kean.”

Jacobson of Asbury Park, a former Democratic member of the Assembly, registered as a Republican last month in preparation of challenging Kean in the Senate primary.  The new legislative map moved Kean, of Wall, into the 30th legislative district.  Kean will be running for Assembly in the 30th, as Republican Senator Robert Singer, Lakewood, also resides in the new 30th.

Jacobson is angry with Kean over his vote against gay marriage.

• Tweet

Something For Dan Jacobson To Consider While Mulling An Assemly Bid

By Art Gallagher

Republican publisher and former Democratic Assemblyman Dan Jacobson says he is mulling running for Assembly in the 11th legislative district GOP primary. 

The potty mouth pundit says he supports incumbent Mary Pat Angelini, in large measure due to her pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage positions and that he is considering a challenge to Caroline Casagrande.  It’s not that Dan has a problem with Casagrande, like he does with Sean Kean. It’s that he thinks he can cause a transformational change in Trenton if he heads to the Assembly beholden to no one.  Free of party ties, donor expectations or special interest loyalty, Dan thinks he can go to Trenton and make government more responsive to the people and less responsive to the special interests.  Dan’s goal is laudable. His proposed method is fool hardy, unless he can recruit many many other candidates of a similar mind set and get all of their petitions signed between now and Monday at 4PM.  Not going to happen.

But Dan knows that already.  He’s lived it already the last time he was in the Assembly 20 years ago. The fun he had driving the leadership crazy is probably more on his mind now than the frustration he experienced. That memory of the fun could be what is driving his consideration of a bid.

What Dan apparently doesn’t realize is that if he files to run for Assembly in the 11th district GOP primary he doesn’t get to choose who he is challenging.  He says he is considering a challenge to Casagrande and not Angelini, but the balloting doesn’t work that way. 

Assuming Mary Pat, Caroline and Dan are the only candidates in the primary, the election would be a 3 way race for 2 nominations.  Dan can say he’s only challenging Caroline all he wants.  The truth is that it would be a 3 way race for 2 nominations and Dan could end up knocking off Mary Pat instead of Caroline.

From my point of view Jacobson is a bigger threat in a 3 way to Angelini than he is to Casagrande. Take it from me, the powerful Republican blogger as Dan calls me, if Jacobson runs he is more of a threat to Angelini than he is to Casagrande.

By both perception and reality, Angelini is more liberal than Casagrande.  While the very popular Angelini will likely be the top vote getter in the general election, she has some problems with the conservative Republican base.  Hardcore conservative voters can be fickle.  Many will vote for Casagrande and no one else.  Many will vote for Casagrande and Jacobson, just to send a message to Angelini.  They won’t mind if Jacobson beats Angelini, figuring they can knock Jacobson off in two years with a real conservative.

Angelini and Casagrande will be bracketed together on the ballot.  Assuming Dan is the only primary challenger, his name would be appear in the column immediately to the right of Angelini and Casagrande on the ballot.  If the party organization positions Mary Pat and Caroline alphabetically, which would make sense since they have the same seniority, Angelini’s name would appear above Casagrande’s.  Jacobson’s name would appear on the ballot right next to Angelini, making it appear on the ballot that Dan is running against Angelini.  Even though the instructions will say “Vote for Two,” many uninformed voters will think they have to choose between Angelini and Jacobson before voting for Casagrande who will appear to be unchallenged.  Some will chose Jacobson and then vote for Casagrande.

Just some food for thought for Dan to include in his mulling this weekend.

Kitten, kitten, kitten.

• Tweet