Why Wisconsin's elections matter

by: tabbycat31

Tue Aug 09, 2011 at 12:33:40 PM EDT

Back in the spring, I posted a diary about my time in Wisconsin recalling a Republican state senator who voted on a "budget-repair" bill that ended collective bargaining for public employees.  I felt then that the chance to be a part of history and participate in a recall.  Should things work out today, and the Wisconsin Democrats time things right, I very well might be back in Wisconsin this fall to recall Scott Walker himself.

Democrats were successful in Wisconsin for the first two rounds of the recalls.  We successfully filed recall petitions against 6 of 8 eligible Republican state senators and all of the "fake Democrats" lost in the primaries (Wisconsin does not have partisan voter registration).  Our ultimate success or failure comes down to today-- election day.  If Democrats do not vote, then the Koch brothers get the message loud and clear that they can use their money to tamper with elections.  They've funded some dirty tricks in Wisconsin lately, and don't assume that we will not see them in November, as Christie is an ally of theirs.  

The View from Wisconsin

by: tabbycat31

Thu Apr 14, 2011 at 12:25:55 AM EDT

In February, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker did what a guy like Chris Christie only dreams of.  He pushed a bill through the legislature ending collective bargaining for public employees such as teachers.  The people in Wisconsin were not happy about it and took to the streets of Madison (and throughout the state).  People in New Jersey even took to the streets of Trenton, and that was as much about Walker's heavier clone as it was about Walker and Wisconsin.

Flash forward two months and the Wisconsin protests have largely fallen out of our short attention span news cycle.  Wisconsin Democrats have done something that I think that the national party (and New Jersey party) should take a lesson from.  They located and used their spines by leaving the state and later filing recall papers against all eight Republican state senators eligible for recall (an elected official in Wisconsin must serve for at least a year before being eligible for a recall).  So this campaign staffer, always in search of her next gig, watched the recalls like a hawk and landed in the smallest city to have an NFL team.   As of this writing, the paperwork has been turned in to recall Republican state senators Dan Kapanke and Randy Hopper.  The Democrats need to flip three state senate seats for control.

Before heading to Wisconsin, I always wondered how the same state can give us a gem like Russ Feingold and an idiot like Paul Ryan.  Now being here in this political climate, the state is as divided as ever.  The only thing that people agree on is their Super Bowl champions.   Unless you are a completely apathetic college student, everyone has an idea of what went on in Madison and has a strong opinion about it one way or another.  I've never before seen a campaign with so few undecided and/or persuadable "voters" (recall petition signers must be eligible to vote in Wisconsin).  So far I have braved the cold and snow (I swear it was spring when I left New Jersey), confrontational teabaggers and College Republicans, and countless encounters with security and law enforcement to fight a historic battle that I believe my (hypothetical) kids will read about in their history books.  After an undeclared 30 year war on organized labor and the middle class, we are finally starting to fight back.  The tide has the chance to turn around and Wisconsin has the potential to lead the way.

The most common question that I am asked here in Wisconsin by fellow staffers, voters I am talking to, and people in general is "why are you here all the way from New Jersey?"  Putting aside the fact that my chosen career field takes me all over the place, my main reason for driving over 1000 miles is that New Jersey has a similar governor to Scott Walker and the only thing that is holding him back is a Democratic controlled legislature (although one can make an argument about exactly how much the legislature is holding him back).  If the GOP takes control of Trenton in November, I see him trying to push an identical bill through in Trenton as what Walker pushed through Madison.  The middle class and Democratic Party in Wisconsin did everything in their power to stop Walker.  It is about time that the middle class and Democratic Party in New Jersey show Christie similar treatment.  This November, the New Jersey Democrats must use Wisconsin as a strong GOTV message.

I Don't Recall

by: deciminyan

Thu Dec 09, 2010 at 02:04:10 PM EST

Recall Chris Christie : The Group Does Exist

by: johnleesandiego

Mon Dec 06, 2010 at 09:45:00 PM EST

Having been through the Recall Gray Davis effort in California I know these things can work.

Recall Gov Christie can be found on facebook at http://www.facebook.com/recall... as well as on their own website at http://recallnjgov.com/

Now if we can only make it legal to buy clothes on Sunday and pump our own gas life would be perfect in the Garden State! :D

New Jersey falls ill, waiting for the Senate to act on Food Safety

by: SururNJPIRG

Tue Sep 21, 2010 at 02:09:30 PM EDT

You might be tempted to pass over the plethora of food safety news thinking that the danger presented by the Wright County Egg recall has passed... You might- unless you live in the Northeast and spat out your milk two weeks ago, because, as you were taking that long pull of delicious white cream straight from the carton, your morning news show announced that your milk hadn't been properly pasteurized... Thinking to yourself, "You've got to be kidding me. Again?!" you grumble about the bureaucratic inefficiency of our food safety net, wonder what the FDA is for in the first place, and stump out the door.
Jump with me:

Tea Party Can't Even Criticize Menendez Correctly

by: JRB

Sat Jul 17, 2010 at 11:13:53 AM EDT

Yesterday, I noted that the Tea Party is mad at Senator Menendez for -- get this -- leading the charge to re-imprison the bomber of Pan Am Flight 103  and investigate BP's part in trading justice for oil drilling contracts in Libya.

The tea partiers, who often chide others as neglectful of the text of the U.S. Constitution, are angry that Menendez is pursuing the Lockerbie/BP criminals when he didn't give the federal government greater surveillance powers (but that was during the Bush administration, so it's OK!). Never mind that pursuing a mass-murderer and reducing civil liberties are not one in the same -- they think he's a hypocrite.

Of course, they also think there's nothing hypocritical about pocket-constitution-thumping when they're trying to disrupt more than two centuries of the constitutionally designated six-year Senate term. Whatever suits their partisan agenda.

And -- surprise! -- the Tea Party also cited a vote that was wrong, wrong, wrong. They claimed Menendez voted against implementing the 9/11 commission recommendations. Except he didn't. Not in the least. He voted against a motion that would gut the bill. He happened to be a co-sponsor of the bill that passed the Senate, and the original sponsor of the bill introduced in the House in 2006.

In response came this gem from Rob Asaro-Angelo: "If this Tea Party organization misrepresents a fact so basic as Senator Menendez's leadership on the 9/11 Commission bill, it has to make people wonder what else they are misleading about. You have to fact-check what you read on the internet, but I guess that's too much to ask from the folks who founded Conservapedia."

Quote of the Night: Constitutional Edition

by: Hopeful

Wed May 26, 2010 at 12:53:27 AM EDT

"The only thing you can find is some handwritten note from Washington and you want to disregard the Federalist Papers?"

NJ Supremes will hear Menendez recall case

by: Rosi Efthim

Wed Apr 28, 2010 at 02:05:23 PM EDT

AP is reporting that the NJ Supreme Court has decided to hear the case, petitioned by Sen. Bob Menendez, of the tea party drive to recall the senator.

The tea party's gripe against Menendez distills to his vote supporting health care reform, and votes they don't like on government spending. But the charge of racism is also often - and likely correctly - cited as a reason the right-wing activists targeted Menendez.

A state appeals court ruled last month that the tea party has the right to try and toss a United States Senator from duly-elected office. But the court also barred action on the necessary signature collection until the appeal is decided.  

At issue is the rights guaranteed in the NJ Constitution versus those found in the United States Constitution. New Jersey's document allows recalls; America's does not. It is hard to imagine how the national constitution will not prevail.

Arguments are scheduled for May 25.

On the "Tea Party" and Bob Menendez

by: Hopeful

Mon Apr 12, 2010 at 10:09:01 PM EDT

Tom Schaller of FiveThirtyEight.com points us to a new poll out of the University of Washington (tables here). The results are revealing...

White Tea Party supporters are less likely than other whites to think Latinos are "intelligent"  or "trustworthy," though a majority say Latinos are "hard working." Those same white supporters are also less likely to think Blacks are any of those three (especially "hard working"), and they overwhelmingly agree "If Blacks would just try harder they would be as well off as Whites." They say immigrants are "likely to take jobs from people working here," that immigration "should be decreased," and even "all undocumented immigrants should be deported immediately."  

In short, this is evidence, though indirect, that John Wisniewski was right about the Menendez recall:

"These are radical people who chose Menendez off of a list of Democrats because of the sound of his last name."

Deep Thought

by: Hopeful

Wed Mar 31, 2010 at 04:19:22 PM EDT

Followers of Moktada al-Sadr, the militant cleric whose militia was a major force in the Shiite insurgency against American forces, announced Wednesday that they were arranging a special vote to pick Iraq's next prime minister...

The move appeared to be part political gimmick and part public relations masterstroke. The referendum would have no legal authority, but it continues the political maturing of a movement that moved away from violence, embraced the democratic process, and solidified its political force in the March 7 parliamentary election.

Isn't it odd that this is the same gimmick the Tea Party is using in trying to "recall" Menendez?

(I know, it's not the same at all: the Tea Party hasn't fought any real battles and it hasn't won any elections either.)

Menendez recall effort picks lawyer who does not accept science of astronomy

by: Hopeful

Mon Mar 22, 2010 at 09:07:55 PM EDT

Andrew L. Schlafly, son of Phyllis Schlafly of the Eagle Forum, has just become the new lead counsel for the committee seeking to recall Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), RoseAnn Salanitri, chairman of that committee, announced today...

Schlafly is also the founder and chief administrator of Conservapedia, which opened to the Internet in November of 2006. Conservapedia began as a project of a 50-strong group of home-schooled students but now includes thousands of editors.

Conservapedia is sadly one of those sites that make both liberals and scientists think conservatives are stupid, which is too bad since that is not true for most of them.

Here's a fine example, to pick something that wouldn't seem controversial to most people. Wikipedia's article on the Andromeda Galaxy includes the information that astronomers believe it is about 2.5 million light-years away. Conservapedia simply notes "N/A" for its distance. Not Applicable? The Andromeda Galaxy doesn't exist in a location? Andrew Schafly left a record of why citing the distance to a galaxy is ludicrous liberalism. He follows a pretty disturbing kind of Christianity that thinks the existence of distant galaxies disproves the existence of God, so he denies them altogether.  

Tea Party wins a round against Menendez

by: Rosi Efthim

Tue Mar 16, 2010 at 12:42:18 PM EDT

This is a first. And it is a surprise. And no doubt, it is a muscle flex for the reactionary forces of the still-forming Tea Parties. The Appeals Court ruling found the U.S. Supreme Court has never ruled on the issue of recalling a U.S. Senator. From the decision:

Given the will of the people embodied in our state organic law, and the dearth of clear precedent nullifying the people's enactments, we accordingly decline at this juncture to find our state constitutional provision and related stature permitting recall of a United States Senator to be unconstitutional. [snip] The silence of the federal Constitution [on recall] may well result in the conclusion that it may be done.

The action was brought by NJ Tea Parties United and the Sussex County Tea Party. Tea Party activists tried last year for permission from Secretary of State Nina Wells, under Gov. Corzine, to begin a petition recall. They went to court when that was denied.

If the petition recall is allowed to move forward, the Tea Party will be required to get one-fourth of New Jersey's registered voters to sign their petition. That means 1.3 million signatures on the dotted line.

The Court said its decision is not "definitively valid or invalid," and in fact put a stay on its own decision until lawyers for Senator Menendez can appeal to the New Jersey Supreme Court. But the Court was definitive in ordering the current Secretary of State to allow the petition effort of the Tea Party to move forward, should the State Supreme Court agree.

Menendez' current term is due to end January 2013.

UPDATE: Statement of NJ State Democratic Chair John Wisniewski: These people are on a crusade to undermine the U.S. Constitution and to discredit human evolution.  Those are not the kinds of radical movements that typical, hard-working folks in New Jersey sign up to join, and that's why this group is looking to Glenn Beck for help.

Attacking the constitutionality of the Constitution is a strange, hypocritical effort, which contradicts the system of elections that most Americans have taken pride in for more than 200 years.

Sorry, but a Recall is not Free Speech

by: Hopeful

Wed Mar 03, 2010 at 12:27:45 PM EST

"The state is trying to draw a bright-line rule completely excluding all possibilities," said Daniel Silberstein, a Clark attorney representing the recall committee. "We are not arguing today for Senator Menendez's recall. We are arguing simply for the right to express our dissatisfaction with Senator Menendez."...

While Silberstein argued the case was about allowing "core political speech" by way of New Jersey's secretary of state approving the recall notice, Menendez attorney Marc E. Elias of Washington, D.C., and state Deputy Attorney General Donna Kelly said the parts of a recall cannot be parsed and the whole effort is unconstitutional. They cited the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, which says federal law trumps a conflicting state law.

This is ridiculous. Tea Partiers, like anyone, can go gather petitions in person -- or online -- all they like. Petition for Menendez to resign. Petition for him to vote against the budget. Petition for a recall. Petition for Exxon to spend $10 million attacking him. Whatever they like. Having a petition trigger a recall is what is at stake, and that is arguably unconstitutional. Besides the Idaho precedent we discussed before, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled term limits for Congress unconstitutional, and that is a very similar issue.

What a U.S. Senate recall ballot would look like

by: Hopeful

Fri Feb 12, 2010 at 10:00:00 AM EST

New Jersey's Title 19 (19:27A-15, 19:27A-16 and 19:27A-17) lays down the rules for the hypothetical recall. The recall would either occur as a special election or on a general election date, but that would be decided in the original petition to be supported (or not) by the public. During the election campaign, the recall committee will have to follow all the campaign contribution rules of a regular campaign committee during the election, as would the "recall defense" committee (Menendez could transfer his money to it.) Can you imagine how negative that campaign would be?

Once recall election day rolls around, the ballot would have the following language as the first question:

Shall Robert Menendez be recalled from the office of United State Senator?"

...with the choice of "Yes" or "No." The actual ballot will not have any reasons for the recall, although the sample ballot will. If "Yes" gets a majority, Senator Menendez's term would terminate upon the certification of the election results. (Again, we're hypothetically assuming the courts have approved the recall and the U.S. Senate will accept the results.) If "No" gets a majority, Menendez continues as if there had never been a recall election. Furthermore, he'd be safe from recall for another year. Oddly, our genius legislators actually wrote the law without any provision for a tie, which would not be a majority of "Yes" or "No," but perhaps I am getting way too hypothetical.

Now, because this is a recall election for a U.S. Senator and not a Governor or a Legislator, the ballot would also elect a successor with the second question:

Nominees for successor to Senator Robert Mendendez in the event he is recalled.

Rob Andrews

Frank LoBiondo

Len Flynn

Gregory Pason

Whoever gets the most votes wins, if and only if "Yes" wins the recall. Now, for this ballot, I chose Rob Andrews for the Democrats to annoy Senator Lautenberg, Frank LoBiondo to annoy the Tea Party, and a couple of independents from the actual 2006 election. In real life, I wouldn't get to choose the ballot--the major party nominees would be chosen by the state committees (19:13-20). The recall law is clear that Bob Menendez could be the nominee for the Democrats. Independents could qualify by petition: "Candidates may also be nominated within that time period by petition in a manner similar to that used for direct nomination by petition for a general election."  Since those petitions are not that easy and they'd have about 14 days, I don't think we'd see as crazy a ballot as the California Davis recall. In particular, there would be only one Democrat and one Republican with party approval. Yes, Menendez could hypothetically be recalled but be chosen by the voters as his own successor, which seems to me would have no effect at all.

Since we're having fun, what about if we recalled Governor Chris Christie by collecting that astonishing 1.3 million signatures and then winning the recall election? The Lt. Governor, Republican Kim Guadagno, would just be promoted to Governor for the remainder of the term.  

Can New Jersey recall a United States Senator?

by: Hopeful

Sat Feb 06, 2010 at 12:11:57 PM EST

"It has been determined that the qualifications and election of a Member of the United States Senate is a matter of exclusive jurisdiction of federal authority and that neither the United States Constitution nor federal statute provide for a recall proceeding for a federally-elected official.

Therefore, in my capacity as the Chief Election Official of the State of New Jersey, I hereby determine that neither the Notice of Intention to Recall nor the proposed Petition can be accepted for filing or review."

In The Lobby points to New Jersey State 19:27A-2 Power to recall elected officials which specifically states that a Senator or Representative can be recalled. (Though, as I said, the numbers required are too high to succeed.) In The Lobby is partly mistaken -- they think Title 19 is part of the Constitution passed by voters, but it is actually a law passed by the legislature -- but it hardly matters. It sounds like the recall attempt should have been allowed -- though not only do they need 1.3 million signatures, but 19:27A-6 says every copy of the petition will need a statement of how much the election will cost up front for voters to read, so I even more skeptical of success, though they do have 320 days to collect signatures.

Why, then, is it widely believed that despite this state law, a Senator cannot be recalled? That's due to a 1967 federal court case where a judge ruled that a right-wing activist could not try to recall Senator Frank Church over his opposition to the Vietnam War. (Yeah, the more things change, the more things stay the same.) The New York Times described the ruling on October 1, 1967 (page 47):

United State District Judge Alfred C. Hagen has ruled that a United State Senator "cannot be recalled by the people of the state from which he was elected."...

The judge said a state recall of a Senator would violate the portion of the Federal Constitution, which says of Congress that "each house shall be the judge ofthe elections, returns and qualifiications of its members."

The ruling did not go to the U.S. Supreme Court but Lousiana's Attorney General recently rejected a recall drive (for a Republican) on the same grounds. Certainly the activists can hope for different rulings in the courts, perhaps even taking it all the way to the Supreme Court, but the Secretary of State seems to have had a valid reason to reject the petition drive.

Now does this mean that it's impossible to remove a corrupt Senator from office, as I have seen some bloggers rant around the Internet? No. The Constitution's Article I, Section 5 states that "Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member." Members of Congress have been expelled but not one has even been recalled.

So, all the Tea Party activists have to do is convince every Republican in the Senate plus nearly half of the Democrats that Menendez deserves to be kicked out. Well, it's about as likely as getting 1.3 million people to sign a petition saying they want to spend millions of dollars on a special election.

The bottom line is that this is an example of a constitutional controversy: New Jersey state law unambiguously says a Senator may be impeached, but the federal courts have ruled that states do not have that power.  

Tea Party not the Math Party

by: Hopeful

Fri Feb 05, 2010 at 07:10:46 PM EST

The group, called the Committee to Recall Senator Robert Menendez, is going to court after its petition to recall the senator was denied by former Secretary of State Nina Mitchell Wells last month.

The Tea Partiers, part of a Sussex County group supporting limited government and opposed to Menendez's stance on healthcare reform, are contesting the decision in a state appeals court.

Dan Silberstein, a lawyer for the group, said the legal battle is over which constitution - the U.S. or state - should apply to residents who want to recall their senators.

"We essentially have a New Jersey constitution that says we can do it," said Silberstein.

Now sadly they don't have a leg to stand on because this is apparently settled law--I say sadly because they don't have a chance of getting a recall even if state law applied. Article I, Paragraph 2b of The New Jersey state constitution requires 25% of registered voters to sign the petitions to even get to hold a recall election. From my previous post:

According to the latest state voter registration statistics, there are 5,227,896 registered voters in New Jersey. So to recall Senator Menendez, my conservative friends will need a minimum of 1,306,974 signatures. Chris Christie only got 1,174,445 votes, so that might be a bit tough for them.

Maybe this higher traffic blog will help. I advise the Tea Party people just collect petitions and never turn them in, because the chance of success is the same without the court costs.

Beachwood Mayor compares himself to Mandela and Walesa, files ethics complaint against Christie

by: Jason Springer

Sat Aug 15, 2009 at 04:40:57 PM EDT

Comparing himself to two famed revolutionaries, Beachwood Mayor Ronald W. Jones Jr. held a news conference Thursday during which he alleged improprieties by two Republican Borough Council members, an Ocean County freeholder, numerous borough employees or appointees, and announced he filed an ethics complaint against Republican gubernatorial candidate, Chris Christie.

"The one thing that I am is someone who is looking to do the right thing to protect the people, even if it's unpopular,'' Jones, a Democrat, told several members of the media in a closed conference room. "And there are other people who go before me, whether it's Nelson Mandela in South Africa or Lech Walesa in Poland, one person needs to make a change and needs to stand up.''

When he was asked Thursday whether he was afraid of being sued after making these allegations, Jones, who said he has already spent $40,000 in legal fees, scoffed, "Oh please. There are more suits against me than there are in the Macy's
men's department.''

...said he first went to the U.S. Attorney's Office in 2003 with allegations of misdeeds by two Republican council members, an Ocean County freeholder, and numerous borough employees or appointees. He said he has reached out to numerous agencies including the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office, the state Division of Criminal Justice, and the state Division of Local Government Services.

Sifting through Out with Trout

by: Rosi Efthim

Wed Feb 04, 2009 at 06:35:15 PM EST

These are the kinds of things - and allegations - popping up in Hunterdon County against Sheriff Deborah Trout, who took office in January 2008, and has been in hot water ever since. A petition to recall the Sheriff has been approved and the clocks counting down 160 days to gather the signatures necessary to put the question on the Nov. 3 ballot.

The case against Sheriff Deborah Trout is complicated, dense with detail. And - depending on who you talk to - is either a slam-dunk or politically-motivated bull. It isn't easy to sort out what may be actionable from what is merely disagreement with the way the Sheriff does things.

Eagleton Institute of NJ Politics says this may be the first official effort to recall a county elected official in state history. If they succeed, it's definitely history. But the bar to take a sheriff's job is set high: 25% of all registered voters in the last general election and that's 21,866 signatures, which started with the first public meeting a few days ago of Out with Trout (which is officially non-partisan). I was surprised to see Marcia Karrow not only show up, but speak.  Karrow (R-Raritan Twp.) will be sworn in in five days as State Senator, replacing Congressman Leonard Lance. Assemblyman Mike Doherty, who promises a he'll take that seat from her, skipped it.

Begin with the fact that Trout is a Republican. A dramatic primary left the first-ever Hunterdon woman to hold the job the surprise winner in 2007. The voters chose Trout over Democrat Bruce Cocuzza, arguably a better-qualified choice. But you find a lot of the same Republican names from the '07 primary pop up in this case, including George Muller, who gave up a Freeholder seat to run for Sheriff, perhaps motivated to add to his state pension years for a cushier retirement. Muller ended up in Trout's administration in a position, Freeholder George Melick alleges, for which there was "no funding" (Melick is calling on Trout to resign). And it appears that some of Trout's former primary rivals are involved in the recall effort, though how closely I don't know. Trout may feel the vultures circling.  

Behind the smell of recall politics

by: Thurman Hart

Mon Aug 11, 2008 at 09:19:03 AM EDT

"We want a government that's for the people by the people," declared David Van Der Wall, a member of the recall committee, who was sporting an American flag polo shirt with the Declaration of Independence emblazoned on the front.

I'm as patriotic as the next guy, and I have a few "July 4th shirts".  But I don't generally wear them in August.  But it's fine.  You know, free country and all that.  I'm just not sure what the Declaration has to do with any mayor's office.

Missed it by THAT much!

by: Jason Springer

Mon Jul 21, 2008 at 07:45:37 PM EDT

The effort's chairman, Carl Bergmanson, said today they have fewer than 100,000 signatures. They need 1.2 million signatures to get a recall question on November's ballot.

Bergmanson said the group faces a Wednesday deadline to submit petitions but won't be doing so, unless they get an unexpected surge in petitions.