Byrne's strategy in the 1977 comeback

by: Hopeful

Sun Apr 12, 2009 at 06:25:12 PM EDT

Each campaign was limited to $1.5 million, and spent $1.3 million on TV and radio ads. There were at least nine(!) debates during the hard-fought campaign. Byrne used the advantage of incumbency, with bill signings held all over the state and his cabinet members making numerous appearances. President Carter made a trip to help him. There was an attack on Byrne over a possibly mob-connected appointment that actually backfired among Italian-Americans. Both candidates called the other names. But at the end of the day, I think the entire campaign came down to the income tax and its future. The new income tax was scheduled to expire in 1978, so this was legitimately the key question. The income tax and Byrne started off extremely unpopular -- and he had even promised no income tax in his first campaign. So how did Byrne turn it all around in October? A September 11, 1977 New York Times article laid out the Byrne strategy:

The Governor's campaign strategy will be to strip the "no tax candidate" from Mr. Bateman and attempt to portray him as advocating an even more onerous alternative to the income-tax progrm.

How did this strategy succeed? First, the income tax actually worked for its stated purpose. Property taxpayers began to get rebate checks in the fall. This was an especially good deal for people who worked in New York and Pennsylvania, since they didn't owe any income tax to New Jersey but still got rebate checks. Not only were there rebate checks, but the papers reported that property taxes did go down in many towns.

Second, Bateman was drawn into presenting his own plan. If you wonder why politicians evade presenting their own plan (Hi Chris Christie!), this could be a textbook case explaining why. The Republican plan involved improving state government, cutting some jobs, and -- if necessary -- increasing the sales tax. It was widely rejected -- not only by Democrats but newspaper editorial boards -- as unrealistic. It seemed pretty obvious that this kind of improving government could not replace the revenue from the income tax. Byrne was able to call the plan "dishonest" and attack Bateman for lying, and went very aggressively after him. In the first debate, Byrne said Bateman didn't have "guts" and even "doesn't fool the kids in fourth grade." Bateman admitted in debates that he might need to raise the sales tax. So, Bateman found himself in the position that the anti-tax candidate would raise your sales tax and/or your property tax. Polls showed that voters didn't want an income tax, but they thought it was here to stay and was better than a sales tax increase.  The Wall Street Journal, in a bitter October 31 editorial, complained that this was unfair, because they (incorrectly) thought the income tax would not possibly be renewed:

Thus, whoever is elected will have the same revenue problem.  But only Mr. Bateman thought to stick his neck out, and now Gov. Byrne is raging up and down the state about how Raymond Bateman is planning to raise sales taxes.

...Can democracy survive in New Jersey?

It survived and Byrne won by making an unpopular tax the lesser of two evils. More generally, I think Bateman failed to give New Jerseyans a strong reason to vote for him. Democrats won the battle of who would run the government better.