PoliticsNJ: Ferriero Will Ask Coniglio to Step Aside

Where there's an investigation, you hope there's fire (0.00 / 0)

If would really suck if Christie can't get the evidence or a conviction and the guy loses his life's work because he got a notice he is being investigated.  Even if Coniglio is guilty and there is no conviction, tossing people for being investigated starts a dangerous pattern.

That's an awful lot of power to put into a politically appointed prosecutor's hands.

---

by: huntsu @ Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 18:20:47 PM UTC

It's a matter of ethics, not conviction (0.00 / 0)

It does not matter whether Senator Coniglio is convicted in a court of law or not. What he and the hospital were up to add up to a blatant breach of ethics.

As an elected official he is a public servant. There are ethical standards by which he should conduct himself. Getting paid off by the hospital to the tune of $5,500 a month in return for $1 million in state subsidies to Hackensack University Medical Center smells worse than a truck load of rotten eggs.

There is an obvious connection between his role as a State Senator and the awarding of the state funds.

U.S. Attorney Christie is doing a great job weeding out those who cash in their ethics for free ride on the taxpayer express. And he's getting a string of convictions along the way, which is really just a bonus in the process.

Ethical  breaches should result in a loss of office or, at a minimum, a suspension from the legislature for a lengthy period of time.

---

by: TerryMalloy-OnTheWaterfront @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 02:00:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not Being Forced Out For Ethics (0.00 / 0)

I'm with you on the ethics, but he's not being forced out for ethical lapses.  The party is considering forcing him out because the LETTER OF INTEREST makes it harder for him to win the election. 

This is about the party keeping hold of a legislative seat, not the party wanting to clean out unethical legislators.

You can applaud the end result of tossing a possibly corrupt pol, but it is still an AWFUL precedent that a US Prosecutor can send a letter of interest to a legislator and that will kick them out of office.

The Prosecutor doesn't even have to INDICT, just publicly say the legislator is under investigation.

That's a scary power for an unelected political appointee to have, even if you think in this case the end result is right.

---

by: huntsu @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 12:19:39 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where's your proof? (0.00 / 0)

There is an obvious connection between his role as a State Senator and the awarding of the state funds.

Show it.  Just saying, "He worked for them.  They got money." isn't enough.

Last I checked, "innocent until proven guilty" was still the way our system worked.

---

by: Hudson Observer @ Wed Aug 22, 2007 at 01:23:47 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Target Letter=Obvious Connection (0.00 / 0)

With all due respect, I will assume that you are not familiar with the day to day details of this story. The fact is that the U.S. Attorney's target letter was issued exactly because there is an "obvious connection between his role as a State Senator and the awarding of the state funds". That's pretty clear.

I do not base any of my comments on any kind of an assumed conviction in a court of law. If he committed a crime, that is a matter for the court to judge.

But in the court of public opinion, where public officials are judged every day in their service to the taxpayers, he has committed a grave ethical violation.  And that should be quickly punished.

Of course, this is par for the course in the world of Joe Ferriero's brand of Democratic politics.

No matter how you slice it, if you're an elected official holding a public trust and you receive a target letter (likely to be followed soon by an indictment) then you must be doing something wrong, whether it is criminal or not.

---

by: TerryMalloy-OnTheWaterfront @ Thu Aug 23, 2007 at 04:24:44 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wow (0.00 / 0)

It is a shame - this is how we lose Democratic seats.  I'd rather lose one in a fair fight with the Republicans than because of this.  But you see - this is EXACTLY why we have to be as squeaky clean as we can be.  Even the appearance of impropriety can derail the longest political career. 

One Vote.  Yours.  It really does matter.

---

by: carolh @ Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 18:58:34 PM UTC

Ferriero is an opportunistic strategist--not a champion of ethics (0.00 / 0)

Chairman Joe Ferriero is an opportunist and a smart political strategist. He sees a vulnerability on his ballot and he knows he must eliminate the weakness and fortify the strength of his Democratic ticket. That is all this is about.

You are right. It is better to lose a fair fight with Republicans than see Democratic candidates/incumbents lose their seats due to ethical violations or worse.

But that is what primaries are for. They are sometimes necessary exercises in democracy that could be used to oust those who seek to use their public trust to personally enrich themselves and their cronies before we get to the main event with Republicans in November.

Someone should have challenged Senator Coniglio in the primary and exposed him at that time.

---

by: TerryMalloy-OnTheWaterfront @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 02:17:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Who will run? (0.00 / 0)

This could be its own thread I suppose, but, who will the Bergen Dems put up for the seat?

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Mon Aug 20, 2007 at 22:53:44 PM UTC

Tedesco (4.00 / 1)

The Mayor of Paramus is the odds-on favorite to replace Coniglio.  It is a shame.  Matt Ahearn, a great progressive and fantastic guy, passed on challenging Coniglio in the primary out of respect for Coniglio, despite the fact that Coniglio was, is, always has been, and always wll be a Ferriero crony.  Now, Coniglio is going to be replaced by another Ferriero crony.

The one person who should be especially happy about this situation is Paul Aropnsohn.  There had been some talk recently about Tedesco becoming the BCDO pick to challenge Scott Garrett in 2008, which would have created a difficult situation for Paul, who would not have had the support of either the progressive community that backed Camille Abate in 2006 or the establishment, which would have backed Tedesco.

If Tedesco gets Coniglio's seat, it is unlikely that he will have any interest in taking on Garrett in 2008, enabling Aronsohn to retain the support of the BCDO for another run at him.

However, if the Real Democrats run an opposition slate of County Committee candidates next year, allow Camille to run at the top of their slate, and can convince Frank Lautenberg to run for re-election unopposed on his own line, Camille and the rest of the Real Democrats could be in the position to pull off some major upsets next year.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Tue Aug 21, 2007 at 00:21:30 AM UTC

[ Parent ]