With last Thursday's Iowa caucuses dominating media coverage across the country, quite a bit of news fell through the cracks. One such story is big news in New Jersey's 3rd congressional district:
The Recreational Fishing Alliance today endorsed John Adler for Congress in the 3rd district.
"John Adler is a staunch advocate of the marine environment and, as a member of the state legislature, has actively supported the recreational fishing community," said Jim Donofrio, Executive Director of the nonpartisan Recreational Fishing Alliance. "Our experience working with Senator Adler has assured us that he is deeply committed to the well-being of the recreational sector and that he will take the concerns of the recreational fishing community to Washington."
I had an opportunity to speak with Jim Donofrio on the phone shortly after the announcement. The Recreational Fishing Alliance typically endorses incumbents or legislators with a strong record of supporting recreation, and they've consistently endorsed Jim Saxton for reelection.
Part of the reason Jim Saxton has been so successful at building his "moderate" image (which we all know is really a facade) is because he's gotten strong support from both recreation/fishing and enviornmental organizations almost across the board. These endorsements had important local effects-- most importantly building strong grassroots support in the shore communities of Ocean County. But the more important effect, at least for Saxton, had been to moderate his extreme conservative views, which helped him beat his opponents decisively in Cherry Hill and key swing areas of Burlington County.
John Adler winning the RFA's endorsement shows that he can't just be written off in Ocean County, and that he'll be a strong contender to pick up Jim Saxton's seat this coming November.
Well into the holiday season and with Christmas approaching, it's always good to reflect on who's played Santa this year. In New Jersey's third congressional district the battle of the bosses about to heat up as the GOP primary to replace Jim Saxton draws ever nearer.
With Burlington County defense contractor Christopher Myers facing off against Ocean County Freeholder John Kelly in the fundraising race, I wonder if Myers will take some time off from campaigning. Why? To play Santa again for Frank Lautenberg, of course!
After all, Myers wrote a nice $500 check to Lautenberg's reelection campaign for Senate in 2007, before Jim Saxton announced his retirement and Myers realized he might want to be a Republican candidate to replace him in Congress:
Whoops! I'll bet Myers is fretting a good bit about whether the Republican rank and file will be ok with him donating to one of the most liberal Senators in the country. But one can only hope he'll feel the holiday spirit and donate through ActBlue to help Lautenberg crush his Republican opponent in 2008.
During the vote last week, Mike Ferguson, Rodney Frelinghuysen and Jim Saxton also voted against it. This time around, the trio voted for it but only after tax-payer funded subsidies of energy companies were put back in the bill. President Bush is expected to sign the legislation.
In conclusion, Ferguson, Frelinghuysen and Saxton want to spend your tax dollars to subsidize the carbon economy, and Scott Garrett is more out of touch than Commander Cuckoo Bananas.
Chris Cillizza at The Fix moves two New Jersey congressional seats into his top 10 ranking of seats most likely to flip party control. The 7th district being vacated by Mike Ferguson appeared at #5, but Cillizza thinks NJ-3 is a "BIG problem for Republicans" and placed it even higher at #3:
5. New Jersey's 7th District (R): Rep. Mike Ferguson's (R) retirement stunned House Republicans who now must defend one of the most expensive Congressional districts in the country (the 7th is entirely within the New York City media market). Adding to the Republican woes is the candidacy of state Assemblywoman Linda Stender (D) who came within 3,000 votes of ousting Ferguson in 2006. Republicans lost their number one recruit when state Sen. Tom Kean Jr. took a pass and now face a likely primary between Kate Whitman, the daughter of former Gov. Christie Todd Whitman (R), and state Sen. Leonard Lance. This district was made more Republican by redistricters in 2001 but given its cost Republicans must nominate a candidate with either a well-known name or deep pockets to compete. (Previous ranking: N/A) [...]
3. New Jersey's 3rd District (R): Rep. Jim Saxton's retirement is a BIG problem for Republicans. Why? First, this south-central Jersey district is marginal territory politically as President Bush won it with just 51 percent in 2004. Second, the district is covered by the incredibly expensive New York City and Philadelphia media markets and is a very tough one in which to communicate. Third, Democrats seem united behind state Sen. John Adler as their candidate, while state Sen. Diane Allen, the preferred Republican candidate, dropped from the race on Thursday, a decision largely credited to her running dispute with the boss of Burlington County. (How can you not love New Jersey politics?) It now looks like Lockheed Martin vice president Christopher Myers will be the Republican pick and will enjoy Saxton's support. (Previous ranking: N/A)
According to PoltiicsNJPolitickerNJ Jim Saxton, the retiring Republican Congressman from NJ3, says he won't endorse anyone to replace him. He does, however, want to be sure the party bosses bypass the Republican voters and anoint someone as his successor.
"I believe it would be extremely worthwhile for the three republican organizations to identify and adopt a district wide process to choose a single candidate for everyone to endorse and support," Saxon told PolitickerNJ.com.
His rationale is that a contentious primary would only help the Democrats and John Adler, and he's a little bit right. It would cost the party money that Adler doesn't have to put up, and possibly get bad press for the ultimate candidate.
But these negatives are overstated, and are used by people in power to protect that power. Primaries also expose candidate weaknesses early instead of late, ensure that the electorate has a commitment to their candidate, and builds organization during what should be a downtime.
Handled properly, a primary victory gives the candidate the ability to stand up to party leaders because they have grassroots support, access to media coverage and their own non-party fundraising apparatus. The bosses don't want this, and generally will do everything they can to avoid a primary.
More primaries means more open processes, and fewer backroom deals. Anyone who claims to be for open government and reduced corruption but hates primaries -- incumbents excepted! -- is blowing smoke and should be called on their hypocrisy.
Word is that the next Cook Political Report will move NJ-3 from Likely Republican to the Toss-Up column. Last week, the Rothenberg Report moved the district being vacated by Rep Saxton to "Pure Toss-Up" while Chris Cillizza at The Fix yesterday gave the edge to Democrats, saying the seat will be a "very tough hold for Republicans."
Chris Cillizza at The Fix says the seat being vacated by Congressman Jim Saxton will be a "very tough hold for Republicans" and "looks ripe for the taking":
Outlook: This is a very tough hold for Republicans -- especially in a presidential year. Republicans note that they made gains in Burlington County in last week's state elections including winning an open state Senate seat. Combine the district's Democratic tendencies, the huge cost of television advertising and the huge financial lead national Democrats hold over their Republican counterparts, however, and this seat looks ripe for the taking.
Rep. Jim Saxton, the twelve-term Republican from New Jersey's 3rd District, plans to retire after his current term, an announcement that could come as early as today, according to sources familiar with his decision.
Saxton's retirement opens up a seat he has held since 1984 and creates another vulnerable open seat for House Republicans. President Bush narrowly carried the district with 51 percent in 2004, and Democrats had been making noise about a potential challenge to Saxton in 2008.
Saxton is the 15th House Republican to decide against seeking reelection; just three Democrats have announced this will be their last term.
The swing nature of Saxton's seat places in it a highly vulnerable category along with open GOP seats in Illinois's 11th Sistrict, Arizona's 1st, Minnesota's 3rd, New Mexico's 1st and Ohio's 15th and 16th.
PolitickerNJ confirms the news and so does Roll Call. State Senator John Adler's chances of becoming New Jersey's newest Congressman suddenly skyrocketed.
"Although I had intended to run in 2008 and was planning a strong campaign, developments which occurred earlier this year regarding my health have prompted me to make this decision," said a statement today from Saxton, a former public school teacher, business owner, state senator and state assemblyman who has never lost an election.
"I plan to serve out the remainder of my current term in the 110th Congress," he said. "I will continue to receive medical treatment, and my health care providers have indicated the prognosis is, in fact, very positive."
Saxton, who will be 66 when the current term ends, has been treated for prostate cancer. He is also being treated for chronic sciatica, a painful back and leg condition.
"I want to publicly thank the residents of Burlington, Ocean and Camden County who sent me to Washington in 1984, and who have given me the privilege of representing them for 24 years," his statement said. "I have always done my best to serve the diverse Third District.
"When making tough decisions, I have honestly weighed the pros and cons at hand, and when possible, compromised and worked with Republicans and Democrats for the greater good. When faced with uphill battles, I have never given up, but instead countered diversity with hard work. I have few regrets, but many fond memories."
Maybe Saxton thinks he already has enough money in the bank and can just relax. Maybe he doesn't think the challenge and climate he is facing are truly a threat. Possibly, being a member of the minority with that prospect unlikely to change, he doesn't have the influence he once did and isn't the sound investment he once was. Or then again, he might be getting ready to surf the GOP retirement wave. Let's see how other GOP members facing tough re-elections have faired this cycle with their fundraising efforts...
GOP Incumbent
Raised this Quarter
Raised this Cycle
Mike Ferguson(NJ-7)
$238,362
$1,046,319
Robin Hayes (NC-8)
$353,236
$851,790
Vern Buchanan (Fl-13)
$411,844
$1,254,533
Mark Kirk (Il-10)
$526,065
$1,789,499
Jim Saxton (NJ-3)
$97,085
$207,857
Randy Kuhl (NY-29)
$170,244
$341,485
Jim Gerlach (Pa-6)
$236,936
$887,496
Charlie Dent (PA-15)
$157,000
$566,886
Dave Reichert (WA-8)
$306,234
$714,034
Chris Shays (CT-4)
$360,307
$850,145
Jim Walsh (NY-25)
$194,145
$621,484
So why is Jim Saxton's fundraising down this cycle, given how hard many in a similar situation facing a tough re-election bid are working? Maybe he agrees with us that it's time for a change.
With the S-CHIP bugaboo at a fevered pitch, I was hoping we could get NJ Sen John Adler onto Blue Jersey BlogTalkRadio over the weekend. I reckoned Sen. Adler -- who's running for Congress -- would welcome the opportunity to share his views on the timely topic of kid's health care.
Just to review: incumbent GOP Congressman Jim Saxton has the best healthcare taxpayer money can buy. But when it comes to making allowances for children's healthcare, Jim Saxton would rather stand by the President. (Nothing new to look at for Blue Jersey readers, but the context is necessary if folks do a Google search to learn about this race.)
Anyway, I wasn't able to track Sen. Adler down, but that's okay he had a really good reason for being incommunicado.
Adler:
I had an intense two day training session with top members of Congresss, leading political consultants, and many of the top tier challenge candidates for 2008, including several open seat candidates.
Billed as a sort of "bootcamp" for top tier candidates, the DCCC -- along with AFSCME -- has hosted such events for the past several cycles. In '06, twelve alums from this bootcamp went on to unseat an incumbent GOP rival.
(So while John Adler was in Chicago honing the stragety, the Blue Jersey BlogTalkRadio juggernaut rolled on. If you missed our show, click here and get with the program!)
It's not surprising that the more steam John Adler gathers, the louder the chatter becomes that Jim Saxton will retire, at least locally.
To that I can only say: SAXTON BETTER NOT RETIRE!!
After getting clobbered by Jim Saxton in 'o6, I want another chance to beat him fair and square. I want the satisfaction of the victory dance after the election is over. (Sports fans, you know the one.)
For democrats in NJ-3 like me, we deserve to muse about a victory dance. After twentysomething years of Jim Saxton's bilge, it's been a looooong time coming.
P.S.: Take the poll (after the flip) and let us know what Congressional District you vote in!
With the recent NAY vote on SCHIP from Congressman Saxton, national democrats are noticing that New Jersey's Third District is indeed in play. With a strong campaign and support from New Jerseyans who believe in progressive values, we can retake the 3rd for Blue Jersey!
It was reported last week that Speaker Nancy Pelosi donated $2,000 dollars to Senator Adler's Congressional Campaign. Later that week House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) also contributed $2,000. This just goes to show that National Democrats are paying attention to this race and so should you!
Jim Saxton, staunch enabler of the President's misguided war in Iraq, would like you to believe that the war is going well. The headlines of this week's call up of nearly half the NJ National Guard, many of whom have already done 1 tour of duty in Iraq paint a different picture...
That's right Congressman Saxton, the war is going so well that if we actually have a situation here at home, we may not be able to respond in the manner necessary because of the decisions that YOU have made, which have our soldiers reffing a Civil War in the Middle East. Thanks Congressman, can't wait for that change in 2008.
Out of all the Republicans to vote against SCHIP, Jim Saxton is by far in the most Democratic-voting district (PVI D+3.3). So when even the Moderate Voice mocks your heartless vote on the most important domestic issue, it might be time to take notice:
The fact that no few [sic] Republicans changed their minds is a victory for the lame-duck president, but it is an empty one for his party because representatives like James Saxton of New Jersey who had what were considered safe seats may be fighting for their political lives next year.
Saxton offered perhaps the lamest reason for sticking with his nay vote in saying that a campaign led by a coalition of labor unions and liberal groups targeting he and other Republicans was "purely political."
Indeed if this vote costs him the labor support he's received in the past, it could be a costly political mistake. But is that all children's health care is to him?...a political game? While a mind-blowing 81% of the public supports expanding the wildly popular program and 74% supports paying higher taxes to do so, Jim Saxton is so out of touch that he'd rather sit tight on the sinking SS Bush than support the program. And now he's hoping we can all move on and forget this ever happened...
"Now that the vote has been cast, I hope the politicization of this issue stops."
Again, he only sees this in terms of politics. He doesn't understand that the children he threw overboard won't get proper health care simply because the vote is over. It's understandable that he'd rather forget all about it. I also wouldn't want to spend the waning moments of my political career going to bed every night thinking about the children I abandoned. And if the challenge to Saxton is half as fierce as signs indicate it will be, he may regret he ever picked a fight with America's kids.
1. SCHIP has been a tremendous help for children across our country whose parents could not afford health insurance but who also weren't poor enough to qualify for Medicaid.
2. There is no doubt about whether needy children should continue to receive health care under SCHIP.
First he acknowledges all the good the SCHIP program has done. Then he cries because more children will be helped by this successful program. But to show you his priorities, he's willing to waste money voting to build a Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska for his cronie, but becomes the fiscal hawk over children's healthcare. Some priorities! After taking away health insurance from kids, he rubs it in with this...
"Now that the vote has been cast, I hope the politicization of this issue stops," said Rep. Saxton through a spokesman.
The next time he needs a kid for a photo shoot, I hope that child knows that they couldn't see a doctor because Jim Saxton was worried that supporting them was political. What a joke.
I hope Jim Saxton gets bludgeoned for this S-CHIP vote coming up tomorrow....assuming of course Saxton bends over for George Bush. Again. Which I fully expect.
Note to Jim Saxton: we don't need S-CHIP to beat you in 'o8 but you can bet the farm that your obit just got a whole lot more unsympathetic!
82 Republican and Democratic New Jersey state legislators signed a letter to the state's Congressmen urging them to "put aside political ideologies in an effort to protect New Jersey children who need health care" by voting to override Bush's veto of the SCHIP program, which will "[create] a gaping $88 million hole in the state budget."
In a press release on Red State earlier today, Congressman Garrett talked about the pressure he's getting to override the veto: "Even New Jersey Governor John [sic] Corzine personally called my office today in hopes of urging me to change my vote." His inability to spell the governor's name aside, he can add Republican legislators from his own district to the growing list of those urging him to do the same: Senator Gerald Cardinale, Senate Minority Leader Leonard Lance and Assemblywoman Charlotte Vandervalk.
Several Republican legislators from Congressmen Jim Saxton and Rodney Frelinghuysen 's district have also signed on to the letter. Senators Diane Allen and Robert Singer and Assemblymen Chistopher Connors and Ronald Dancer represent portions of Saxton's district, while Senators Anthony Bucco and Tom Kean Jr and Assemblymen Jon Bramnick and Eric Munoz represent portions of Frelinghuysen's.
The quarterly (07/01/2007-09/30/2007) FEC filings are now online for many candidates. Here are the numbers for two targeted Republicans in the House:
individual (in)
committee (in)
total (in)
spent (out)
donated (out)
Cash on Hand
Frank Lobiondo
60,245
81,650
155,285
66,941
92,600
1,515,698
Jim Saxton
73,385
23,100
105,818
35,207
12,000
1,393,210
The bottom line is that both these Republicans have ensured that they have a large warchest to face any challengers. (This is more important than usual, since the NRCC is not likely to have much money to come to their aid.) The main difference between them may be due to the fact that Saxton faces a strong challenge from Adler while LoBiondo does not (yet) have one. LoBiondo therefore acts as a kind of money launderer -- More than his $60,000 in individual contributions to "his" re-election efforts flowed outwards to local ($30,500 to Atlantic County, and more to state legislators) and national ($20,000 to the NRCC) Republicans. Saxton, meanwhile, gave only contributions to various Republican Representatives around the country.
"Despite all the discussion about income inequality, the fact is that it hasn't changed in recent years, according to the Census Bureau measure," ranking Joint Economic Committee member Congressman Jim Saxton said today. "Congress should consider this fact before acting on the assumption that income inequality is surging.
The wealthiest 1% of Americans earned 21.2% of all income in 2005, according to new data from the Internal Revenue Service. That is up sharply from 19% in 2004, and surpasses the previous high of 20.8% set in 2000, at the peak of the previous bull market in stocks.
The bottom 50% earned 12.8% of all income, down from 13.4% in 2004 and a bit less than their 13% share in 2000.
The IRS data, based on a large sample of tax returns, are for "adjusted gross income," which is income after some deductions, such as for alimony and contributions to individual retirement accounts. While dated, many scholars prefer it to timelier data from other agencies because it provides details of the very richest -- for example, the top 0.1% and the top 1%, not just the top 10% -- and includes capital gains, an important, though volatile, source of income for the affluent.
The IRS data go back only to 1986, but academic research suggests the rich last had this high a share of total income in the 1920s.
The end of the article has this sobering stat...
The data highlight the political challenge facing Mr. Bush and the Republican contenders for president. They have sought to play up the strength of the economy since 2003 and low unemployment, and the role of Mr. Bush's tax cuts in both. But many Americans think the economy is in or near a recession. The IRS data show that the median tax filer's income -- half earn less than the median, half earn more -- fell 2% between 2000 and 2005 when adjusted for inflation, to $30,881. At the same time, the income level for the tax filer just inside the top 1% grew 3%, to $364,657.
Preliminary math shows the top at +3, the median at -2. Thats a change of 5 with the median falling further behind the top. That seems to be a widening gap. This is just another example of how Jim Saxton is out of touch. In his world, down is up and left is really right. It is so past time for a change.
NJ Democratic chairman and Assemblyman Joe Cryan today urged his Republican colleagues in the legislature to pressure the Republican Congressional delegation to vote to override Bush's veto of SCHIP, claiming their refusal to do so will cost New Jersey taxpayers $88 million (press release):
State Democratic Party Chairman Joseph Cryan on Wednesday called on Republican legislators to help save the children's health insurance program from President Bush's veto by publicly pressing their colleagues in Congress to abandon the President on this issue. Chairman Cryan cited the $88 million impact on the state budget as added incentive.
"If the Republicans aren't convinced by the health care need they should be convinced by the financial cost to New Jersey's budget," said Chairman Cryan, who serves as vice chair of the Assembly Appropriations Committee and chair of the Human Services Committee. "This is not just a federal issue and it's not just a health care issue. There are serious consequences for the state's health insurance program and real consequences for the budget. Republican legislators should put public pressure on the three New Jersey Republicans in Congress who have sided with Bush to help override his veto." [...]
New Jersey won't abandon the children covered by the program if the President's veto is not reversed, Chairman Cryan noted, so the cost will have to be covered by the state budget.
"A number of Republican legislators have voiced support for SCHIP but defensive lip service isn't enough," said Chairman Cryan. "They need to make the case with their party colleagues in Congress and they need to make it convincingly."
If Congressmen Saxton, Garrett, and Frelinghuysen continue to stand with President Bush, then New Jersey taxpayers stand to lose real money. If SCHIP is not re-authorized, then health care obligations that used to be paid by federal government will be paid by New Jersey taxpayers.
.gif)
