This past Saturday, I officially announced that I am a candidate for Congress in New Jersey's 5th District. Our priority as Democrats right now must be finding the best candidate to unseat this extremist and get real representation in Congress - someone fighting for middle class values, not right wing ideologies. I'm not afraid to fight Scott Garrett and his extreme positions that hurt middle class families across New Jersey and the 5th District. During my three terms on the Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders I have worked across the aisle with Republicans and Democrats alike to get things done. I will bring that same type of leadership to the halls of Congress.
We need common sense solutions, not partisan bickering.
I know what it takes to win in Republican territory. In 2010, Democrats were swept out of office in record numbers across New Jersey and the nation. This wasn't the case in Passaic County. On a ticket led by Congressman Pascrell, we bucked the national trend and were reelected by a strong margin - even with a popular Sheriff dropping out of the race only two months before Election Day. We need a Democrat who can go into Republican territory and make a populist appeal to voters. And most importantly, expose Congressman Garrett's extreme record.
I know I am that candidate in 2012.
I want to join the ranks of giants like Senator Frank Lautenberg, Senator Bob Menendez and Congressman Bill Pascrell to put our nation back on track. I will work with Democrats across the 5th District to ensure victories up-and-down the ballot. Now more than ever we need to come together and beat Scott Garrett. I am going to need your help in the coming months talking to your neighbors, going door-to-door and exposing Scott Garrett's extreme record in Congress. And I hope you'll follow my campaign on Twitter and Facebook as we move forward.
Between marriage equality, debates over education policy, and a Democratic primary in NJ-9 that is heating up, it's a busy time at Blue Jersey. But even as we learn that Assemblywoman Wagner will not be running, we must continue organizing and mobilizing in NJ-5. We cannot let the district fall off our radar. As a 22-year-old soon-to-be constituent of Scott Garrett, I know this race is far too important -- because Scott Garrett is bad for young people (and for everyone else, too).
On the issues important to young people, Rep. Scott Garrett has consistently stood against progress. SAFRA, the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2009, is a particularly good example. Benefits of SAFRA included expanding the Perkins Loan Program, enabling more families to qualify for Pell Grants, and taking the private, for-profit middlemen out of the loan business. Students and taxpayers won, but Garrett voted no. No to saving taxpayers money - and no to helping young people go to college.
While I would have loved to have seen Wagner run for a number of reasons, it seemed to me (just my gut feeling from some discussions and observations I had) that others were more enthusiastic about her running than she may have been. This is no knock against her - it is a huge undertaking and commitment to run for Congress, and Garrett has been known to play dirty against his opponents (recall he smeared former opponent and Rabbi Dennis Shulman as anti-Israel).
This creates a void in terms of big name NJ politicos who can raise the attention and money required to mount a successful run against a very well-funded Garrett. Whether this was in the works for a while, whether this clears the way for former NY Giant Harry Carson to make a run (which has a lot of appeal as well as some potential hurdles), or whether it opens the door for a primary fight among a number of already-declared other candidates remains to be seen.
Either way, this decision by Assemblywoman Wagner to not run (if confirmed) is too bad as it would have brought a different and more high profile seasoned politician to challenge Garrett with more built in and coordinated support from the Democratic Committee of Bergen County. Hopefully, whoever emerges as the challenger will receive coordinated support that will be needed up and down the ballot - especially with the Presidential and Senatorial races this coming year. It is a big opportunity for Democrats in Bergen County and hopefully it isn't a missed opportunity.
I have lived in Northwestern New Jersey in CD5 for over 30 years, but for the last 9+ years I have had the misfortune of having Scott Garrett as my Representative in Congress. Assemblywoman Connie Wagner would be my choice to unseat him. Having served in the Assembly since 2008, representing the 38th District, she has proven to be a champion of progressive ideals and values. I also think that Connie will be able to raise a significant amount of money in order to compete against Garrett and the Tea Party money.
Dr. Tom Sacks-Wilner lives in Medford, CD3. For several years I have been a donor to Tom's fundraising/bundling group. He is a person who raises money readily and efficiently. With an expansive donor base that he has fashioned, he can easily raise at least $6 million from now to November 6. His ability to fundraise will provide the mandatory funds needed to define Jon Runyan. He has been politically active behind the scenes, especially in progressive causes.
In light of the Republican-favorable redistricting, Connie and Tom would each have a mountain to climb to defeat their respective opponent; however the challenge is certainly not insurmountable. I believe both would make their races interesting, should they choose to run.
Since New Jersey was redistricted late last month, leaving the state with one less congressional district and a volatile, unsettled Democratic Party beginning what looks to be an ugly primary contest between Bill Pascrell and Steve Rothman, focus has been on the 9th, the district Rothman declined to run in.
That leaves the 5th an open question; who will challenge Tea Party darling Scott Garrett?
I don't know much about Gussen, except that 3 years when he was a councilman ago he filed to primary Valerie Huttle and Gordon Johnson, who serve LD-37 with Sen. Loretta Weinberg, and then dropped out.
Bergen folks, I'd be interested to know your impressions of Gussen and how strong he might be against Garrett.
How to strike the right note in this diary. Now, that's a challenge. As someone who has been an outspoken fan of primaries, I certainly can't and won't join the chorus of Democratic leaders horrified by Steve Rothman's decision to run against Bill Pascrell in a primary solely because a primary is expensive or can be divisive. Sometimes, primaries are important ideological fights and can be valuable party-building opportunities.
Unfortunately, the situation in NJ-9 is clearly neither: Steve Rothman, unhappy with the outcome of Congressional Redistricting, is moving from his home in Fair Lawn 10 miles east to somewhere in Englewood for the sole purpose of challenging his fellow Democrat, Bill Pascrell, because he calculates that's the best way to stay in Congress.
Instead of using his sizeable war chest - and up to $2 million additional dollars of funding from the DCCC - to challenge Scott Garrett, we now get to watch him spend that money against his friend, a democratic colleague with whom he has no ideological or political dispute. At a minimum, I considered this a disappointing decision, which I assumed was reached after much soul-searching.
So, I was shocked to learn that Rothman never seriously weighed running against Republican Scott Garrett. While nearly every democrat in New Jersey rejoiced at what appeared to be the potential finally to take out our most conservative tea-party Congressman, Steve Rothman never even seriously considered that opportunity.
That's a huge loss for the Democratic Party. Rothman is running away from a winnable fight with Scott Garrett, and running against one of the most effective - and most progressive - members of Congress. If the City of Paterson had been moved into Scott Garrett's district, we all know Bill Pascrell would be all in trying to take Garrett out. And that contrast is something I think Democrats can and should fairly take into consideration when evaluating who they are supporting this June.
It's no secret where I stand. I was on a long list of Bergen, Hudson and Passaic County officials endorsing Bill Pascrell. I'm standing with Pascrell for a lot of reasons - his strong record fighting for the middle class, his tireless work to obtain national park status for the Great Falls and his commitment to job creation. But I'm also disappointed. Disappointed Rothman would rather start this fight than take on a Tea Party Republican we've been trying to oust for years.
As the Record's Al Doblin noted, if Rothman were to run against Garrett, "Even if [he] lost, he would win" - a hero among democrats for taking on the fight. Instead, Rothman's putting himself in a position where the exact opposite might happen.
I'm still hoping he reconsiders. Or at least gives it serious consideration.
A lot has been said, both here at Blue Jersey and in the traditional media, about the recent Congressional redistricting - and more specifically with an eye on the new Fifth and Ninth Districts. Here in the Fifth, where I (still) live, the District is better in terms of the ability to beat radical right winger Scott Garrett, but the District is still a fairly Republican district. Where things are very interesting in terms of just how serious the New Jersey Democratic Party is, not to mention the national Democratic Party, lies right here in Bergen County.
When Rep. Steve Rothman decided to run against Rep. Bill Pascrell in the Ninth as opposed to running against Garrett, my thought on the bigger picture is that there will be a lot of money spent on a Democratic Primary (assuming there is one) that could have been much better spent knocking down one of the worst Representatives in the truest sense of the word "representative" in that Garrett does not represent the best interest of most of his constituents.
This past November, with your support, I was re-elected to the State Assembly to represent Bergen and Passaic Counties. I am honored to have earned your trust and respect over the past 4 years as your Assemblywoman. I've never considered myself a politician, but always a public servant. I have been elected to serve the people of New Jersey, something many elected officials forget, which is truly the most important part of our job.
Our state and country face many challenges and it will take the efforts of Democrats, Republicans and everyone in between to improve the quality of life for all Americans.
Public education has been the backbone of America and at every turn there are those seeking to dismantle it. Higher education is becoming out of reach for many of our high school graduates due to escalating tuition. Our environment and our health are being put at risk at a time when we should be embracing new technology to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy. Government inefficiencies and outdated ways of doing things continue to keep the costs of running government too high. Unemployment and underemployment are rampant, jobs continue to be shipped overseas and the middle class in America is struggling to survive.
These are among the major issues dear to my heart, issues that I have fought, and will continue to fight, to address. In what capacity I can best tackle these challenges is a question I am now confronted with.
PolitickerNJ is reporting that according to "two sources with knowledge of the offer" say that DCCC offered a cool $1 million to Steve Rothman if he stayed in the 5th to challenge Scott Garrett. And that the offer would slide up to $2 mil if polling showed the matchup competitive.
The sources are unnamed.
What would be the motivation for somebody to tell politicker this?
DCCC? No. Rothman has already declared his intentions in the 9th, no reason to screw a 15-year House member. Even if the story's true, it doesn't serve DCCC to embarrass a congressional Dem.
Rothman's team? Obviously, no. Only hurts the boss.
There's a lot of anger directed at Rothman now from some corners. You can read it all over our pages, but not from me. Disappointment, even for some a sense of betrayal, that Rothman would "take the easy route" and compete with another Democrat in the district Pascrell now lives in, but with constituents the bulk of which Rothman represents. Resentment that Rothman declined to challenge a Tea Party love-object in a district with a clear GOP advantage.
I have no idea if the item is true or not. But I can't help thinking who gains in a story without evidence or confirmation from the players that makes Rothman look bad, or look like somebody DCCC might write off. Am I too cynical?
This past week, we've seen a lot about the impact of congressional redistricting and the positioning of candidates in North Jersey for the upcoming election. Congressman Steve Rothman has declared that he will move and challenge his colleague Bill Pascrell in a primary rather than face incumbent Republican extremist Scott Garrett. Whether or not Rothman's decision is a good one, it hurts me to see two Democrats spending a million dollars to knock each other off when the money could be better spent in an all-out effort to oust Garrett, one of the worst members of Congress.
It also bothers me that the Fourth Estate has virtually ignored the important race in the Third District. Another member of the "worst congressman's club" is former NFL bad boy and current congressman Jon Runyan. Runyan's voting record is as bad as Garrett's, and over time if Runyan builds up seniority in the House, his impact will be just as deleterious.
Wagner supporters are using facebook to rally for her. Bertin has the link - so does Nick - if you haven't seen it. Anybody know if any other potential NJ-5 candidates have a social media campaign presence? - promoted by Rosi
Ever since it was first announced that Congressman Steve Rothman would be running for re-election in CD9 instead of CD5, I have talked up the idea of drafting Assemblywoman Connie Wagner to run in CD5 against Congressman Scott Garrett, based on my belief that she has the potential to be a stronger candidate in this district than Rothman, because of her capacity to attract national attention and dollars.
Just a few minutes ago, while reading a thread started by our very own Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg, I discovered that a Draft Connie Facebook group has been started. Please join me in joining this group and working to build energy and excitement around this extremely important effort.
U.S. Rep. Steve Rothman (D-9th Dist.) is telling Democrats he plans to challenge Bill Pascrell (D-8th Dist.) in the June primary, according to two Democratic sources with knowledge of the congressman's thinking.
A few anonymous sources are quoted for the article. An announcement from Rothman is apparently due this week.
Needless to say, I am sorry to have found this out, and I hope a strong Democrat will come forward to take on Garrett. It's obviously going to be someone without a $1.5 million war chest, but we need to support them all the same.
The Republican, elected to Congress in 2003, is one of the most vexing in an already right-leaning House of Representatives; a wingnut the tea party loves to love. The Democrat, who went to Congress in 1997, came out early for Barack Obama when nearly the entire NJ Democratic establishment was pushing Hillary Clinton, and became the president's Northeast Regional co-Chair.
Now, the Democratic members of NJ's congressional redistricting commission have submitted a final map that pits Scott Garrett (NJ-5) against Steve Rothman (NJ-9) in one competitive district, as reported in nj.com this morning.
John Farmer, Jr. the former New Jersey Attorney General and current Rutgers-Newark Law School Dean, now is empowered to decide between proposals from the Democratic and Republican teams, six members each. What the GOP proposes is still unclear.
New Jersey's population loss loses us one seat in the House, and the Democrats' plan focuses on the north, the region that has seen the greatest shifts. The NJ congressional delegation as it stands now is 7 Democrats, 6 Republicans. The Democrats' map would create 6 safe districts for Democrats, 5 for Republicans and the competitive district one both parties - and perhaps two incumbent congressmen - would have to battle for.
Notwithstanding my views as someone who specializes in employment tax on the whole "payroll tax rate reduction" that was in effect for 2011 and is now back on the table for 2012, I want to offer up a perfect example of the noncommittal but hidden agenda of my representative, Scott Garrett. Over the five years I've lived in his District, I have been able to learn and master the understanding of "Garrettspeak" - which is essentially the clouding of issues, justification of votes or statements with reasons that may apply at one time (states' rights for most of his votes) but not for others (the recent vote about concealed carry laws or Terri Schiavo, for example) - and most importantly, the little nugget in most statements that show his true constituency - the upper echelon of the 1%.
Garrett was recently quoted in a NY Times post highlighting a "rift" in the Republican House caucus on the issue of the payroll tax cut. This relates to the reduction in the rate for the employee portion of social security tax from 6.2% (of the first $106,800 in 2011) to 4.2%.
In the article, Garrett's quote is as full of nothing as you can get in one quote:
Representative Scott Garrett, Republican of New Jersey, noted that the Senate on Thursday rejected two competing versions of a payroll tax cut. "If the Senate is able to do that, we could do it, too," he said.
"We should not be taking money from seniors to give to people who are fortunate enough to have a job," Mr. Garrett said.
So to be fair, it isn't just state's rights hypocrite Scott Garrett who voted to allow for federal overreach in permitting individuals to carry concealed and loaded weapons into New Jersey if they have a permit to do so that is issued by another state - even though New Jersey's gun laws do not permit this of New Jersey residents. And it wasn't just Scott Garrett who, along with every NJ House Republican voted against an amendment to exclude terrorists, stalkers, pedophiles, those who have committed domestic violence and other violent criminals from the lax concealed carry rules that this federal overreach would result in
But (1) Garrett is my Congressman (lucky me), and (2) he has used "states' rights" as a reason for many many of his many many many many extreme votes - saying that he thinks that {INSERT COMMON SENSE ISSUE HERE} should not be decided by the Federal Government and that it should be left to the states to decide. One other notable exception to this rule is when Garrett thought it was A-OK for the Federal Government to overstep into the bedroom of Terri and Michael Schiavo in a deeply private and personal medical matter.
With Garrett, it is always about weasel-like excuses such as "we all agree on 'X', but....." with the "but" mainly being Federal overreach. Here, Garrett is just fine with Federal overreach when it is for the NRA (who, according to OpenSecrets ) has given Garrett close to $30,000 over the years) - even though it puts his constituents at risk.
That being said, this little video I did could just as easily apply to so called "social moderates" Leonard Lance or Rodney Frelinghuysen, or any of the other NJ House Republicans. But I did it for Garrett instead. Hope you enjoy it.
Blue Jersey's Quote of the Day is out of the mouth of Congressman Scott Garrett, of New Jersey's 5th congressional district, and its 90% whiteness.
I only take note of the 5th CD's whiteness, because I confess I'm baffled what the hell Scott Garrett was talking about on a "backwoods" tour of (even lily-whiter) Warren County for some business visits last week, ending up at Rudolph Research Analytical in Washington Township (in Morris County, but near Hackettstown, in his purview). Rudolph Research Analytical is a 30,000 square foot lab that designs devices for the pharmaceutical, chemical, petroleum & food industries. Some labs have an outsize demographic of Asian people working in them (and plenty don't) and some people think all Asian people are alike. Is that what Garrett was talking about? Or was he commenting on people darker than himself? What, what, Scott Garrett? What does this mean?
The lab's director, Richard C. Spanier, said something nice about dealing with people in the American Midwest. Their attitude is "straight-forward". To which Garrett replied:
"Other ethnicities are not that way," Garrett said. "They'll say yes to you constantly and then you'll realize they really didn't mean it."
Other ethnicities? Dude. What are you talking about? You scare me.
Ironically but not surprisingly, Sarah Palin and a good number of those on the right like to address their crowds, who have increasingly been playing dress-up as "patriots" (and not in the Tom Brady kind of way), as "Real Americans™". They talk about "the tree of liberty", "patriotism" and any number of cherry picked or out-of-context quotes from the Founding Fathers or the Bible. Yet when it comes to actions, what we see from her, Scott Garrett, Chris Christie, Eric Cantor, many on the right (and a growing number on the "left" as well) is just the opposite of what a "real American" is.
Real Americans don't vote for $50 billion in Iraq "reconstruction" like Eric Cantor, Scott Garrett and so many Republicans did with no strings attached, yet demand more cuts here in America to help those in need after devastating earthquakes and hurricanes.
Fake Patriots like Chris Christie and so many Republicans talk about cutting Medicare and social security benefits for those who desperately need them, cloaking it as "reform", while turning their nose up at raising the social security wage limit to address the most regressive tax in this country.
Last week, I wrote a post about how House Republicans like Scott Garrett and Eric Cantor were using this past week's disasters (earthquake, Hurricane Irene) and used them as a sick opportunity to take cheap shots at those who were the most in need and vulnerable.
Of course, I'm referring to the self righteous calls for more cuts to desperately needed programs to help those who aren't super rich in order to pay for cleanup of the massive and widespread damage.
Hopefully, everyone is safe, with power back on if it was lost or all water bailed out (as I spent most of yesterday doing) or all tree branches picked up (as I still have to finish myself).
House Republicans demanded earlier this year that new disaster relief be funded by cuts elsewhere, and House Majority Leader Eric Cantor's office said Thursday the Virginia Republican continues to believe that.
Rep. Scott Garrett agreed. Garrett, R-N.J., said through a spokesman it was the "responsible thing to do."
"With $16 trillion in debt and budget deficits as far as the eye can see, the last thing we should be doing is spending money we don't have," Garrett spokesman Ben Veghte said.
