Fifteen donors pooled their money to provide 60% of the funds used to power Reform Jersey Now, the shady slush fund created to privately boost Chris Christie's agenda, and hit Democrats who might oppose it. The fund was created for the new governor by his GOP allies and run by Mike DuHaime, GOP strategist and the architect of Christie's campaign, with former Franklin Lakes councilman Chuck Shotmeyer listed as president.
Was this list released today to divert attention from Chris Christie's irresponsible decision to leave the state to avoid handling a messy snow emergency? The governor's due back in New Jersey tomorrow.
In a memo Reform released today, 244 donors are listed - including the core 15 - combining for a total raised of $623,784. Read the entire list here.
Missing is a list of the fund's expenditures, so New Jerseyans can follow the impact of the private financing of the slush fund's activities. For the most part, Reform acted in secret, but some of its projects are known: radio ads in June supporting Christie's property tax agenda (and in no way making clear that the support came from a group organized around the governor), and a direct mail & robo-call campaign directed at Democratic lawmakers like senators Steve Sweeney and Paul Sarlo. Reform had a half-year life, and will shut down Friday.
John Crowley (Princeton Twp), Amicus Therapeutics CEO who almost ran for US Senate in 2008, and the subject of a film about his children and their rare illness.
Sol Barer (Westfield), former CEO of Celgene Corp, a biotech firm.
Spencer Baretz & John Hellerman, of Hellerman Baretz Communications, a PR firm.
2 national GOP committees; a policy committee under the Republican Governor's Association, which made an adoring short film about Christie's 2009 upset win that premiered in a D.C. theater, and the State Government Leadership Foundation.
4 companies in the construction & development sector: Ferreira Construction Co., George Harms Construction, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, and home-builder Toll Brothers Inc..
Issues Mobilization Committee, a Realtors issues group.
Jeff Michaels, former chief of staff under Gov. Donald DiFrancesco
follow me below the fold for more scandalous details.
Basically, the two parties seem to be on the cusp of achieving alignment on two calendar-related issues. First, both parties clearly want to push the so-called "pre-primary window" for the approved, early states to after February 1, instead of January 1. Second, because the RNC's ad hoc delegate selection committee has recommended designating Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina as the four states that would be allowed to conduct primaries/caucuses in the February, pre-primary window, the two parties could very well have the same four contests in the same four states on identical dates during February 2012.
...(The GOP is also likely to require proportional assignment of delegates for any state that holds its primary or caucus before April 2012, but I will wait to talk about the implications of that once the GOP's new rules are set in stone.)
There's no reason to imagine this matters for President Obama's re-nomination but the Republicans are a different story. You might remember that New Jersey Republicans used an early winner-take-all 2008 primary, intended to help Rudy Giuliani, that ultimately benefited John McCain. (McCain had already taken a commanding lead for the nomination in Florida's even earlier winner-take-all primary.) Under these new proposed rules, that won't be possible, and perhaps the state will be more competitive.
The schedule the two parties want to push through will conflict with many states' desires to go early, desires that have been codified here in New Jersey election law
19:2-1. Presidential primary elections for delegates and alternates to national conventions of political parties shall be held in each presidential year on the Tuesday next after the first Monday in February.
Will the current Democratic legislature* cooperate with the Republican National Committee to change our election law? It will be interesting to see. I also look forward to the spectacle of Governor Christie trying to maximize his influence using New Jersey's primary.
Would you move New Jersey back to March if the RNC and DNC asks us to? Would you just return to the regular June date?
*I don't see how it could wait until the next legislature in January 2012.
The RNC is sending robocalls from Rudy Giuliani and John McCain into the homes of NJ Voters. Here's the Rudy call:
Hi this is Rudy Giuliani. I'm calling because I care about what's going on in New Jersey. The Trenton Democrats broke their promises and raised billions of dollars in taxes. Business, jobs and families have been driven out of the state. Special interests dominate Trenton and corruption continues to fester at taxpayers expense. Business as usual can't be allowed any longer. We need your vote to get New Jersey back on the right track. On Tuesday, November 3, let's replace the Trenton tax machine for the real change NJ needs. Vote Republican
This is John McCain calling with an urgent message. Trenton Democrats broke their promises and raised millions of dollars in taxes. As a result, businesses, jobs and families have been driven away. These corrupt special interests will continue to dominate unless you take action. This is an extremely close election and your vote will make a difference. On Tuesday November 3, vote Republican for the real change NJ needs.
And the RNC isn't alone, Rosi got a robo-call from Cory Booker the other day. Let us know in the comments if you've gotten any robo-calls.
As I've said before, I'm fascinated by the RNC resolution renaming the Democratic Party the Democrat Socialist Party. Given that the Republicans have a major role in our government, I'm really happy that it looks like the voices of reason are modifying to a less ridiculous form. Still, this video of RNC members by American News Project is well worth watching. New Jersey's Tom Wilson (He's at 2:05) comes off fairly well, calling the resolution "more trouble than it's worth" and talking about "they" not "we." (Ironically, he'll be out next month.)
Who's your favorite? The one who thinks Democrats are Nazis? The one who thinks Obama is going beyond European Socialism?
David Norcross, a former state party chairman, said in a telephone interview on Election Day that in some ways the race showed the ''fallacy of the moderates in talking about a big tent.''
''They're the ones who always said it was a big tent, but when it came time to let the conservatives in, they didn't want to do it,'' Mr. Norcross said. ''That is a problem that will be front and center and that will have to be dealt with.''
Most now think Norcross's strategy of excluding moderates led to losses first in New Jersey and then nationwide, so he's not exactly the brightest bulb in politics. As for the socialist name, a few months ago conservatives tried to name George W. Bush a socialist in another RNC resolution.
Of course it's completely appropriate for the Republicans to pass resolutions showing how they differ from Democrats (or even their own leader.) It's the name-calling that is an expression of a party that can't be trusted with government... Iraq and New Orleans taught us that. For all that the right made up the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome," here is my account from 2007 of how the DNC passed resolutions:
The DNC Resolutions, co-chaired by Maria Echaveste and James J. Zogby, had a surprising atmosphere: Throughout the meeting, loud jazz music from the neighboring room made it hard to hear. I was struck that many of the resolutions could have come from the blogs: "Calling for the Restoration of Habeus Corpus," "Stressing the Need for Action in Sudan," "Supporting Accurate, Open Transparent Elections in the United States of America," "Commending Howard Dean for the 50 State Strategy," and, of course, "Expressing Deep Concern with the Bush Administration's Performance in Iraq." Well, that last was kinder than any blog title would be, but the resolution clearly condemns every aspect of Bush's policies and his attempt to escalate the war. When the resolution opposing escalation came up, the chair asked "Are there people opposed to this?" Everyone laughed.
"Expressing Deep Concern" vs. calling the people names. I hope for the country's sake Republicans find themselves some new RNC members who don't have the maturity of five-year-olds.
The National Republican Congressional Committee, which this year dispatched a half-dozen operatives to comb through tax, court and other records looking for damaging information on Democratic candidates, plans to spend more than 90 percent of its $50 million-plus advertising budget on what officials described as negative ads.
The hope is that a vigorous effort to "define" opponents, in the parlance of GOP operatives, can help Republicans shift the midterm debate away from Iraq and limit losses this fall.
This national strategy should sound familiar, because it is exactly the strategy of the Kean camp as well. There is always something that can be blown up into a negative ad. It's even better if you have a Bush fundraiser to launch -- and obviously leak -- an investigation. The Kean camp must have been surprised when their first Menendez smear was rejected by the press -- who after all, allowed Kerry and Gore to be smeared -- so they will try again and again. It'll be Linda Stender's turn next. A Republican lobbyist says: "It will take one or two punches to fold them up like a cheap suit." All this is because they don't want us to remember what's really going on.
What's at stake for this country is clear:
George Bush is going to try to privatize social security next year. He said it last Thursday. Only Democrats stand between him and this.
George Bush is not going to hold anyone accountable for Iraq and is not going to change his disastrous course.
Republicans and especially Tom Kean Jr. will do anything to stop us from being to concentrate on these issues. But that's what's at stake.
