Wednesday, December 2, 2009

A Little Less Courtesy Could Go A Long Way

The Star-Ledger
December 2, 2009


        Government is rarely criticized for practicing too much courtesy, but that is the problem with the State Senate’s process for confirming members of New Jersey’s boards and commissions. The 500 such groups – some advisory and others with significant responsibility and power - create a potentially admirable avenue for meaningful public participation. With a total of approximately 6000 seats, interested citizens can contribute their time and expertise to help guide the implementation of key laws and programs.
        Unfortunately, however, many of these groups are unable to operate  effectively because they lack a full complement of members. By all accounts, the situation is even worse now than it was in 2004, when a study by the Eagleton Institute of Politics found that 36% of the slots were either vacant or held by people whose terms had already expired. As I step down from chairing the New Jersey Highlands Council, for example, appointments are up-to-date for only three of the 15 members. 
The blame does not lie with a particular administration or political party, but rather with the long-standing practice called “Senatorial courtesy.” As currently interpreted, it means that the State Senate will not consider confirming nominations put forward by the Governor until each Senator representing any part of the county in which the nominee resides signs off. As a result, the “courtesy” to single-handedly block a nominee is granted to as many as seven senators in some counties.
While “Senatorial courtesy” is not written in any law or regulation, it is not without merit. It helps address the imbalance of power between the branches of government in a state known to have one of the nation’s most powerful chief executives. Individual senators can block a nominee not only when they find the candidate objectionable, but also when they want a bargaining chip for something unrelated.
The application of this tradition to New Jersey’s commissions, however, which severely undercuts their ability to function, rarely actually gives a senator any added clout. The groups are deprived of the members needed for a quorum while, with thousands of slots on hundreds of commissions, the Governor’s office lacks the time and resources to cajole or bargain on more than a few. The result is that they stay vacant.
The problem could be fixed if the Senate would limit the application of Senatorial courtesy to nominees for paid positions. It is one thing to keep this hurdle in the path of potential judges, cabinet members and other top officials seeking the highest-paying jobs government has to offer. These posts have sufficiently high visibility that when a Senator threatens to block a nomination, the Governor’s office is usually quick to negotiate. Also, public attention and pressure can usually be brought to bear successfully. In contrast, when one or more State Senators refuse to sign off on candidates for boards and commissions, no one much notices.
The big loser is public participation in government. Not only are these commissions prevented from performing well, but the long-term vacancies encourage cynicism among people who care about their missions. Meanwhile, the citizens from all walks of life who agree to serve on them and then wait months or years for their nomination to be confirmed are left feeling frustrated, used and angry.
This process, it is said, will never change. The dysfunction caused by something so arcane will not evoke organized outrage and, without outrage, no legislative body is likely to relinquish even a small amount of power. Moreover, the only people who even know the rules for reforming this unwritten tradition may be the Senators themselves.
Yet, an oddity of history may create a rare opportunity for reform in this year’s lame duck session. It is almost certainly the last time the Senate will be led by someone who also served as Governor. Dick Codey’s perspective is unique as the only governor to have nominated board members, as Senate President, he could not get confirmed because one or two senators invoked Senatorial courtesy.
Senate President Codey could seize this moment to make a small change that would allow the boards and commissions he and his colleagues have created over the years to truly help bridge the gap between government and the governed. If he can’t fix this process, it’s hard to see how or when it will ever be done.



John Weingart is the Deputy Director of the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers and the outgoing Chairman of the New Jersey Highlands Council.

Wednesday, November 4, 2009

A preliminary look back at 2009 election

View Original Post

Nov. 4, 2009: Yesterday's victory by (Jon Corzine or Chris Christie) in New Jersey's gubernatorial election was never really in doubt. The historic political patterns and economic forces within the state were just too powerful for the other candidate to have a chance.

Analysis (for use if Corzine wins):
It has been clear for many years that New Jersey is now a solidly Democratic state in which Republicans simply shouldn't expect to win. The state has supported every Democratic candidate for president since 1992 and in 2008 gave Barack Obama 57 percent of the vote. No Republican has been



One other historical factor favoring the Republicans was New Jersey's practice, after the last five presidential elections, of issuing a cautionary note to the winner by selecting a governor from the
party not occupying the White House. Thus, the first chance Garden State's voters got to go to the
polls after the victories of Republicans George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush in 1988, 2000 and
2004, they gave the governorship to Democrats Jim Florio, Jim McGreevey and Corzine respectively. Similarly, New Jersey elected and re-lected Republican Whitman in 1993 and 1997 right after the
nation did the same for Democrat Bill Clinton. Why would anyone think this year was going to be
different?

Conclusion: Three final factors can't be ignored.

First, President Obama's (renewed or diminishing) popularity in New Jersey combined with Corzine's extensive campaigning (for or against) him in the (fall or spring) of 2008 made it obvious that the White House was going to be of (great or little) assistance.

Second, independent Chris Daggett, whose candidacy could have hurt (Corzine or Christie) wound up (doing exactly the opposite or having no effect).

Finally and of most significance in determining the outcome, the winning party picked the perfect candidate with extensive background and experience addressing (corruption or finance), which everyone knew would be the deciding issue in the 2009 election.