Time For A Change in New Jersey
By Scott D. Platton
Monday 2nd November 2009
Monday 2nd November 2009
I have found there to be some surprise amongst St Andreans when I mention to those not in the know, that in the United States, 2009 is an election year. The surprise is understandable: odd years are not typically election years in the States, and an election so soon after the emotionally draining 2008 elections seems like too much. Yet, my home state of New Jersey is never one to disappoint. We do our state-level elections in odd years, and this 2009 cycle – centring on the gubernatorial race - has been one of the most brutal in recent memory. (Virginia, incidentally, does its elections in odd years as well; the Republicans look set to capture the governor’s mansion, bucking the hysterical predictions of pundits that the Old Dominion was becoming a “blue state” after falling to Obama in ’08).
The race pits Jon Corzine, the incumbent Democratic governor, against Chris Christie, the US Attorney for New Jersey under George W. Bush. Corzine – an ex-financial chief at Goldman Sachs – is deeply unpopular. He has presided over a collapse in public finances, tax hikes, high unemployment, an exodus of corporate capital (New Jersey has the highest corporate tax rates in the country; a situation which Corzine has done nothing to alter), and a labour and brain drain as younger workers leave the state for the slightly sunnier economic climates of neighbouring New York and Pennsylvania. His term has seen multiple cases of corruption in the state government come to the surface, the most egregious of which (involving money laundering and the sale of harvested organs abroad) netted a cabinet officer, several Democratic municipal officials, and, bizarrely, a large group of rabbis. His opponent, Chris Christie, came into the race with a strong anti-corruption record. His campaign has centred heavily on the theme of cleaning up the state’s entrenched culture of governmental corruption, and cutting the onerously high taxes. A third-party candidate, Chris Daggett, is running a quixotic campaign that garners anywhere from 5% to 12% in the polls.
Corzine’s record is too weak for him to run on alone. Nor can he rely on Obama’s coattails: he has received none of the bounce that the president’s election was expected to provide to Democrats. Early on, Corzine trailed Christie badly – by around 15 points in the summer. The governor has closed the poll gap (the two are in a statistical dead heat according to most polls since October 1) by falling back on the classic tactics of the weak incumbent: smears and attack ads. He has attempted tried to portray Christie as a right-wing radical, whose economic policies will bankrupt the state and whose social policies will see funding cuts to Medicaid (health care for the state’s poor), state pensions, and other social services. Hilariously (in a “if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry” way), Corzine has attacked the anti-corruption crusader – the man who launched the very investigation that brought down that cabinet official and those New Jersey Democratic nabobs – as corrupt.
These accusations are odious and false. Firstly, Christie is no radical. This is New Jersey, and a world of difference separates a mainstream New Jersey Republican from, say, a Mike Huckabee or a Sarah Palin. New Jersey Republicans who make it as high as Christie has are what used to be called Rockefeller Republicans: socially moderate, fiscally conservative politicians in the mould of Gerald Ford or George H.W. Bush. Christie will not take away a woman’s right to choose, nor deny a woman on Medicaid access to a mammogram (a particularly nasty and baseless charge of Corzine’s, in light of the fact that Christie’s mother suffered from breast cancer). He is personally pro-life, but has stated repeatedly that he will not use his position as governor to “force that down people’s throats.” Nor can the economy be ruined by Christie, for Corzine has already ruined it. The Republican’s plans to lower the corporate tax rate (again, the highest in the nation) and the crippling property taxes (also among the highest in the nation) seem sensible in an economic cycle as poor as the current one. The state needs to become more competitive in attracting corporations, and needs to keep more money in the pockets of taxpayers.
The corruption charge, too, is spurious and hypocritical. Christie forgot to mention in his financial disclosures for the elections a $46,000 loan for a mortgage given to a colleague in the U.S Attorney’s Office in 2007. Corzine has pounced on this as a sign of corruption. Here is the kicker: during the 2005 gubernatorial campaign, Corzine himself forgave and neglected to disclose a $470,000 loan to his mistress, Carla Katz. This is the same Carla Katz who headed the New Jersey branch of the Communication Workers’ Union, which was involved in renegotiating the contracts of state employees. Christie’s loan was to help a colleague with keeping a home; Corzine’s was to a big labour boss that he was sleeping with, in a clear conflict of interests.
On top of all of that, Governor Corzine has resorted to ads that seem to highlight the rather portly Christie’s weight. Really? That does not even qualify as dirty politics: it is pure schoolyard juvenilia. Jon Corzine has been a poor governor, with a weak record, a weak campaign, and, even for New Jersey, a sense of corruption about his administration. Chris Christie is the right choice for governor. I just hope that my fellow New Jerseyans see it that way on November 3rd.
The race pits Jon Corzine, the incumbent Democratic governor, against Chris Christie, the US Attorney for New Jersey under George W. Bush. Corzine – an ex-financial chief at Goldman Sachs – is deeply unpopular. He has presided over a collapse in public finances, tax hikes, high unemployment, an exodus of corporate capital (New Jersey has the highest corporate tax rates in the country; a situation which Corzine has done nothing to alter), and a labour and brain drain as younger workers leave the state for the slightly sunnier economic climates of neighbouring New York and Pennsylvania. His term has seen multiple cases of corruption in the state government come to the surface, the most egregious of which (involving money laundering and the sale of harvested organs abroad) netted a cabinet officer, several Democratic municipal officials, and, bizarrely, a large group of rabbis. His opponent, Chris Christie, came into the race with a strong anti-corruption record. His campaign has centred heavily on the theme of cleaning up the state’s entrenched culture of governmental corruption, and cutting the onerously high taxes. A third-party candidate, Chris Daggett, is running a quixotic campaign that garners anywhere from 5% to 12% in the polls.
Corzine’s record is too weak for him to run on alone. Nor can he rely on Obama’s coattails: he has received none of the bounce that the president’s election was expected to provide to Democrats. Early on, Corzine trailed Christie badly – by around 15 points in the summer. The governor has closed the poll gap (the two are in a statistical dead heat according to most polls since October 1) by falling back on the classic tactics of the weak incumbent: smears and attack ads. He has attempted tried to portray Christie as a right-wing radical, whose economic policies will bankrupt the state and whose social policies will see funding cuts to Medicaid (health care for the state’s poor), state pensions, and other social services. Hilariously (in a “if you don’t laugh, you’ll cry” way), Corzine has attacked the anti-corruption crusader – the man who launched the very investigation that brought down that cabinet official and those New Jersey Democratic nabobs – as corrupt.
These accusations are odious and false. Firstly, Christie is no radical. This is New Jersey, and a world of difference separates a mainstream New Jersey Republican from, say, a Mike Huckabee or a Sarah Palin. New Jersey Republicans who make it as high as Christie has are what used to be called Rockefeller Republicans: socially moderate, fiscally conservative politicians in the mould of Gerald Ford or George H.W. Bush. Christie will not take away a woman’s right to choose, nor deny a woman on Medicaid access to a mammogram (a particularly nasty and baseless charge of Corzine’s, in light of the fact that Christie’s mother suffered from breast cancer). He is personally pro-life, but has stated repeatedly that he will not use his position as governor to “force that down people’s throats.” Nor can the economy be ruined by Christie, for Corzine has already ruined it. The Republican’s plans to lower the corporate tax rate (again, the highest in the nation) and the crippling property taxes (also among the highest in the nation) seem sensible in an economic cycle as poor as the current one. The state needs to become more competitive in attracting corporations, and needs to keep more money in the pockets of taxpayers.
The corruption charge, too, is spurious and hypocritical. Christie forgot to mention in his financial disclosures for the elections a $46,000 loan for a mortgage given to a colleague in the U.S Attorney’s Office in 2007. Corzine has pounced on this as a sign of corruption. Here is the kicker: during the 2005 gubernatorial campaign, Corzine himself forgave and neglected to disclose a $470,000 loan to his mistress, Carla Katz. This is the same Carla Katz who headed the New Jersey branch of the Communication Workers’ Union, which was involved in renegotiating the contracts of state employees. Christie’s loan was to help a colleague with keeping a home; Corzine’s was to a big labour boss that he was sleeping with, in a clear conflict of interests.
On top of all of that, Governor Corzine has resorted to ads that seem to highlight the rather portly Christie’s weight. Really? That does not even qualify as dirty politics: it is pure schoolyard juvenilia. Jon Corzine has been a poor governor, with a weak record, a weak campaign, and, even for New Jersey, a sense of corruption about his administration. Chris Christie is the right choice for governor. I just hope that my fellow New Jerseyans see it that way on November 3rd.