Worse than Corzine: Christie's approval ratings hit all-time low

I have to agree with the comment from my friend Shane Derris who posted this comment on his Facebook page:

"Worse than Corzine - What's impressive is that Corzine had these low numbers in the heart of the recession, but CC has more or less inflicted it on himself. CC is just another epic hero trapped by his own hubris."


From NJ.com

TRENTON — Gov. Chris Christie's job approval rating in the state has hit another record low, according to a new poll released Tuesday, which found he has a lower rating than his Democratic predecessor, Gov. Jon Corzine, had when Christie defeated him in 2009. 

Christie's approval rating dropped to 30 percent, with more than half polled — 55 percent — saying they disprove of the job he's doing, according to the Fairleigh Dickinson University PublicMind survey. The approval rating is a six-percentage point drop from a similar poll PublicMind conducted in April. 

Corzine left office with 58 percent job disapproval and only a third of voters — 33 percent — who said they approved of his performance, according to PublicMind January 2010 poll. 

The new survey comes as Christie, a Republican, is on the cusp of announcing a 2016 presidential campaign. 

"The good news is that none of his potential presidential opponents have emerged with a decisive lead yet," said Krista Jenkins, professor of political science and director of PublicMind. "The bad news is that he is the governor in a state where a sizeable majority give a thumbs down to his leadership." 

Worse than Corzine" - What's impressive is that Corzine had these low numbers in the heart of the recession, but CC has more or less inflicted it on himself. CC is just another epic hero trapped by his own hubris.

Continue Reading 

NJPP Monday Minute 7/5/10: Family Leave Insurance gets high marks on first anniversary

The dynamics of work and family have changed drastically in the past 50 years. In today's shaky economic climate, it's not unusual for working parents to juggle one or more jobs to make ends meet, leaving less time for family caregiving responsibilities.

New Jersey has worked to strengthen state policies for working families and became a leader among states by implementing Family Leave Insurance last year. Signed into law by former Gov. Jon Corzine, Family Leave Insurance gives workers up to six weeks of paid benefits to care for sick family members or to bond with newborn and newly-adopted children. New Jersey is only the second state (after California) to offer this type of paid leave.

By all accounts FLI is a hugely successful program. While some business groups initially opposed the idea as an unfair burden, especially on smaller businesses, most employers now recognize that it has not been the nightmare forecast by some.

Here are the most recent statistics from the NJ Department of Labor:

• Between July 1, 2009 and July 1, 2010, approximately 26,000 people benefited from the program.
• 86% of the beneficiaries were women between the ages of 25 and 44.
• 80% of claims were to allow parents to bond with newborn or newly adopted children.
• 77% of beneficiaries were employed in the private sector.
• The average duration of leave was 4.6 weeks, less than the 5.5 weeks expected when the law was enacted.
• 85% of those who applied were approved for leave. Denials were predominantly due to an insufficient relationship between the worker and family member needing care (parent, spouse - yes; great aunt, step-uncle - no).

Family Leave Insurance benefits in New Jersey are funded entirely by employee payroll deductions based on a formula adjusted annually according to the taxable wage base. For this year, the payroll deduction was .012% of wages earned. The maximum amount anyone was required to contribute was $35.64.

To be eligible for Family Leave Insurance benefits, a worker has to be employed by a New Jersey covered employer and earn at least $145 per week during 20 calendar weeks in the base year. The base year covers 52 weeks immediately preceding the week in which Family Leave Insurance coverage would begin. Only New Jersey covered wages can be used to establish a valid claim. The weekly benefit rate is 2/3 of average weekly wages, with a maximum of $561. Employers with fewer than 50 workers are not required to hold open the employee's job.

Fewer people than originally expected have taken advantage of the program.

New Jersey collected $131.4 million in taxes for FLI between April 2009 and May 2010, and paid out $59.9 million in benefits during that same time.

NJPP Monday Minute: 2/16/10 JUST HOW BIG IS THAT DEFICIT?

This is the first in the Monday Minute series on the New Jersey state budget. Last week, Governor Christie declared a state of emergency to deal with the state's "unprecedented financial crisis". Was that action necessary or simply posturing?

All states (except Vermont) are constitutionally required to balance their budgets. All but four states start their fiscal years on July 1. When we talk about FY 2010 in New Jersey, we are talking about the year that started on July 1, 2009 and will end on June 30, 2010.

To be in balance, the budget must have enough revenue by June 30 to fund the programs included in the budget. If revenues are lower than spending, the resulting deficit must be corrected by year end-either through infusions of revenue, using reserve funds or program cuts.

In January last year, the state was facing a $2 billion operating deficit in its FY 2009 budget. By May it had ballooned to $4.4 billion largely due to an unprecedented 12 percent decline in overall revenues. To close this deficit, federal Medicaid funds were used to offset state funds; budget surpluses were spent down; a tax amnesty program was enacted; and $2.5 billion in program cuts were made.

As that budget year was ending, the administration and legislature were struggling to craft the FY 2010 budget which had an $8 billion structural deficit. The structural deficit is not the same as the operating deficit. Unlike the operating deficit which deals with only the current fiscal year, the structural deficit takes into account all of the state's financial obligations-like pension payments and the statutory cost of funding a program-and requires the state to account for them. A budget that fails to make pension payments or overrides statutory formulas can be balanced if they rightly or wrongly are not included as full financial obligations in that year.

The FY 2010 structural deficit was resolved by a combination of taxes, federal money and spending cuts. The most significant source of revenue ($1 billion) was from a one year income tax rate increase on taxpayers with $400,000 or more in taxable income. Federal Medicaid and Fiscal Stabilization funding provided $2.3 billion for certain state services. The base budget was cut by $3.3 billion, including the decision to save $1 billion by not making the pension payment, cutbacks in property tax rebates to homeowners and renters, debt restructuring, unpaid furloughs and various other cuts to programs. In addition, nearly $1.2 billion in savings were found by freezing program growth.

These measures allowed Governor Corzine on June 29, 2009 to sign a balanced budget into law that was expected to raise $29.371 billion in revenues and spend $28.99 billion, leaving an end of the year surplus of $381 million.

Not surprisingly everything wasn't perfect. It is extremely difficult to project revenues and expenditures into the future-made more so by the uncertainties of the national weak economy.

In bad budget years, outgoing and incoming governors point fingers to pass the blame. The Corzine administration claims to have left a budget surplus of $425 million on January 14; the Christie administration claims it was left a $1.3 billion deficit.

To make matters more dramatic, Governor Christie signed an executive order declaring a state of emergency on February 11. It was required, he said, because the state budget would be out of balance on June 30 by $2.2 billion. By his administration's estimates, the state will collect $1.3 billion less revenue by the end of June and will need to spend an additional $872 million to meet its obligations.

So who is right in this posturing?

Their first disagreement is over the size of the revenue shortfall. Corzine officials claim it is $425 million but say those are actual amounts for the first six months of the fiscal year only. They don't project what the deficit might be through June 30th.

The Christie administration claims a $1.3 billion deficit through June 30th. They seem to accept the Corzine estimate of $425 million for the first six months but believe revenue will fall off between January and June of this year, making the end of year deficit substantially larger. Whether this will happen is anyone's guess.

Substantial unknowns exist. These revenue data don't include a full accounting of sales tax collections from the holiday shopping season. No one can accurately predict what will happen in April when taxpayers settle up their income tax accounts with the state. Some believe the economy is starting to improve which may have a positive impact on tax collections through June 30th. All of these could produce a more positive revenue outlook.

Another disagreement is over the state's spending needs between now and June 30th. In December, an additional $596 million was needed; those needs have grown to $870 million. Included are higher than anticipated costs for programs such as Medicaid, snow removal and food pantries. Many of these unanticipated costs are driven by the bad economy.

The third disagreement is about the impact of the Corzine administration's actions prior to the change in administration. On December 22, Governor Corzine announced a plan to close a projected $924 million budget gap in the FY 2010 budget which included $839 million in spending cuts. Included in that $839 million was a $260 million reduction in aid to school districts and the requirement that school districts use their excess surplus balances. A comparison of Governor Corzine's December 22 spending cuts with those announced by Governor Christie on February 11 suggests some overlap-particularly with respect to what is referred to as school district surpluses.

Whether we have a surplus or a deficit, the tax and spending decisions being made right now are likely to have a long term effect on the quality of life in this state. Change may be needed but let's make it responsibly with the best information available.

Due to the President's Day Holiday the Monday Minute is being distributed today.

NJPP Monday Minute: 1/4/10

Every year, New Jersey gives away billions of dollars through tax credits, deductions, exemptions and cooperative agreements that - once enacted - seldom get reviewed. No one knows how much money the state forgoes because few people have been interested - until now.

Despite not being found in any appropriation line in the state budget, these "spending initiatives" represent spending. Unlike the spending that takes place in the budget, which must be reauthorized each year, these credits, deductions and exemptions - collectively known as tax expenditures - are part of the tax code. Because this form of spending is largely invisible, it gets little scrutiny.

Every program that receives no scrutiny has the potential to crowd out more important programs. That is because every dollar the state doesn't collect is a dollar that must be raised by increasing an existing tax rate, taxing something else or providing fewer services.

Like traditional spending, tax expenditures are policy decisions that reflect government's priorities. They cost state treasuries money in much the same way as direct spending for schools, health care or road construction. The only real difference is that instead of collecting and paying out money, this money isn't collected at all. One might think this is more efficient than collecting and redistributing revenues. That is the case only if the benefits of these programs are reviewed annually along with programs requiring a direct appropriation.

Some tax expenditures are good and reflect taxpayers' beliefs. In New Jersey, for instance, we do not collect sales tax on food, clothes or prescription medicine. These policy decisions cost the state hundreds of millions of dollars a year in revenue, however most New Jersey residents would agree with those choices. There would be less agreement about the decision to grant special interest tax credits to a specific business, especially if that business costs the state a lot and there was no proof of its overall benefit to every resident, not just to the few recipients of those credits.

Another costly example of a tax expenditure is the long-standing agreement between New York and New Jersey that taxes residents' income based on where they work instead of where they live. New York State actually tracks and publishes this information. Based on their reporting, in 2004, that agreement cost New Jersey about $1.5 billion a year, a number that is likely higher now. Under this agreement, most people who live in New Jersey but work in New York pay more to New York than they would to New Jersey. New Jersey has a different agreement with Pennsylvania. As a result of that agreement, New Jersey and Pennsylvania incomes are taxed where a person lives, not where he or she works. Whether that is a benefit or a cost to New Jersey is unknown because we don't collect and analyze the information.

Although most states track this information and make it public, New Jersey does not. This would change if a bill introduced by Sen. Barbara Buono, chairwoman of the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee, becomes law. Sen. Buono's bill would require the governor's annual budget message to include a tax expenditure report, which would list each tax expenditure and its cost to the state.

In all likelihood, the totals would be significant. Washington State, for example, has reported that its 567 state and local tax expenditures cost nearly $99 billion a year in lost revenue; Oregon reports that its 362 expenditures cost nearly $29 billion; and Illinois' 214 cost nearly $7 billion.

The idea of reporting this information is nothing new, even in New Jersey. In January 2006, Gov. Corzine's transition team recommended that the state produce a tax expenditure report. Later that year, the state Division of Taxation developed a basic framework for a report, identifying 121 sales and use tax exemptions and exemptions, 44 gross income tax exclusions and 28 corporate business tax exclusions. Then, in November 2007, Gov. Corzine signed a bill into law requiring the state treasurer to produce an annual report with information on development subsidies. This report has yet to be produced.

Understanding how much the state spends through its tax code is even more critical now, as declining revenues will force New Jersey lawmakers to make more difficult decisions about how to spend taxpayer dollars. A tax expenditure budget is not a panacea. It will not automatically provide all the money the state needs to resolve its precarious fiscal situation. But, it will lead to more information, which can only lead to better choices, more appropriate spending and more accountability.

It is time for New Jersey to join the 41 other states, the District of Columbia and the federal government in recognizing that informed choices, whether they are direct appropriations in the annual budget or revenues foregone through the tax code, are ultimately better choices.

N.J. Democrats Demand Marriage Vote

Advocate.com-

In the wake of reports indicating that New Jersey lawmakers may be reluctant to bring a marriage equality bill to the floor during the lame duck session, some 200 Democrats sent a letter on Tuesday urging senate and assembly leaders to take a vote on the bill.

The prominent Democrats want action on the measure before the session ends and governor-elect Chris Christie, a Republican who has vowed to veto the marriage equality bill, takes office on January 19.

According to the Associated Press, “the Democrats, including members of congress, fundraisers and lobbyists , released a letter to leaders in the senate and assembly Tuesday demanding the bill be voted up or down before the lame-duck session ends in January.”

On Monday, a report in the Star-Ledger suggested that prospects for the marriage equality bill looked extremely bleak. Lead sponsor Senator Loretta Weinberg was quoted as saying, “I can’t say I’m confident now.”

Corzine Accomplishments Tempered By Tough Times

Here is a very nice article that appeared over the weekend on the Philadelphia Inquirer website that I thought i would pass along. It talks about Governor Corzine's accomplishments while in office and what kind of legacy he can point to in the future:

As Gov. Corzine heads into what are likely to be the final weeks of his political life, following the failure of his reelection bid on Tuesday, it's unclear whether the bearded Midwestern native with the down-to-earth demeanor and the sweater vests will be remembered more for his legislative accomplishments or for the car wreck that nearly took his life in 2007.

Will people recall that the former Wall Street maven spent over $120 million of his own money on his campaigns and poured millions more into party coffers? Or will his legacy be the work he did for New Jersey's schoolchildren?

"I think a good part of his legacy will have something to do with his car accident," said Mary Forsberg, interim president of New Jersey Policy Perspective, a left-leaning think tank. "It's really a sad thing. From our point of view, he did a lot of good, progressive things."

Corzine's accomplishments - or lack thereof - must be viewed in the context of a brutal nationwide recession, say many observers.

"Legacy changes as time goes on," said Senate President Dick Codey, who preceded Corzine as interim governor after Gov. Jim McGreevey resigned. In the end, he said, Corzine "will be known as a man who tried to do the right thing for the state of New Jersey and got caught up in a very, very horrible recession."

Among the campaign pledges Corzine was forced to abandon was a promise to increase property tax rebates by 40 percent over four years.

Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University, characterized Corzine's governorship as one of "unfulfilled promise." Corzine waded into the muck of New Jersey politics and was unable to make much headway, Baker said.

"Democratic governors as a group tend to be trapped in the feudal politics of New Jersey," he said. They depend so heavily on county and regional political bosses, legislative bosses, and public-employee unions that they have trouble standing up to them, Baker said.

In his efforts to trim state spending, Corzine won significant concessions from public-employee unions. He forced workers to contribute to their health insurance for the first time, increased the retirement age from 55 to 62, and cut 8,200 jobs from the government payroll through attrition.

But to a skeptical public, those accomplishments were overshadowed by Republicans' questions concerning his romantic relationship with Carla Katz, then head of one of the state's largest public-employee unions.

Corzine's relationship with the Legislature, controlled by fellow Democrats throughout his tenure, has sometimes been torturous.

In his first year in office, he faced off against Assembly Democrats over raising the sales tax. The battle resulted in a historic shutdown of state government. Corzine spent many nights on a cot he ordered wheeled into the Statehouse in a grand gesture intended to push lawmakers toward a resolution. Though he was successful in getting the tax increased to 7 percent from 6 percent, the 2006 incident foreshadowed many more periods of tension with the legislative branch.

On issues where Corzine was able to find allies in the Legislature, he was able to effect significant change, particularly on social issues. In 2007, New Jersey became the first state to abolish the death penalty since the Supreme Court reinstated capital punishment in 1976.

Last year, the Garden State became the third state to adopt paid family leave, which grants workers up to six weeks to care for sick family members, newborns, or newly adopted children.

In 2006, Corzine signed the civil-unions law, which extends to gay couples most of the rights of married couples. He also helped expand medical coverage for children in New Jersey, resulting in 100,000 more children being enrolled in the state's health insurance program, according to the administration. Implementing court-ordered preschool programs in poor school districts was another achievement.

According to Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts Jr., those accomplishments reflect Corzine's priorities.

"He has been front and center in fighting for people who needed someone there for them, and I don't think he got the credit for it," the Camden County Democrat said.

Battered by a withering economy and the nation's highest property taxes, New Jersey voters on Tuesday said they believed Republican Christopher J. Christie would do a better job of reining in spending and helping the state recover.

"Gov. Corzine's legacy will be that his ambitions exceeded the state's ability to support them," said State Republican Chairman Jay Webber. "He wanted to spend more and raise taxes to spend more, and on Tuesday people said that they want to go in a different direction."

But Ingrid Reed, New Jersey project director at Rutgers' Eagleton Institute of Politics, said Corzine deserved credit for cutting the state budget.

"He really did reduce the state budget, which really has not happened before in New Jersey," she said. He "has set a kind of standard for being responsible about the state budget."

Corzine often pointed out that during his administration, he put more money into the state pension system than the previous three governors combined.

His efforts to change the school funding formula also will impact state spending for decades. Under the new formula, state aid is directed to any district with poor students rather than just the poorest districts.

Corzine took no time to tout the revised funding formula, instead diving into his 2008 proposal to pay down state debt and fund transportation by raising tolls up to 800 percent over more than a decade. The governor famously abandoned the plan midway through a scheduled 21-county road show to sell it directly to residents.

Likewise, the governor's progress in ethics reform - which admittedly fell short of his ambitious goals - often was overshadowed by high-profile arrests of politicians by Christie, the U.S. attorney.

Corzine all but did away with the Trenton tradition of "Christmas trees," earmarks inserted into the state budget at the last minute without public scrutiny. And he shamed the Legislature into accepting a ban on dual office-holding, though the measure grandfathered in a number of politicians who earn multiple paychecks.

But those accomplishments meant little to the public when Democratic State Sens. Sharpe James and Wayne Bryant were convicted, or when 44 people were arrested in July and accused of international money laundering and political corruption.

Joseph Marbach, a political analyst at Seton Hall University, believes it is unfortunate that people may focus on Corzine's missteps rather than his accomplishments.

"Politics doesn't necessary come naturally to him," Marbach said. "That hindered some of the possible accomplishments he might have been able to achieve."

Former Democratic Gov. Brendan T. Byrne said he called Corzine several times to urge him to trumpet some of his achievements, but Corzine declined.

"It wasn't his nature," Byrne said. "I don't think he's the kind of politician who's built for this business."

In the final assessment, Byrne said, history will be kinder to Corzine than voters were this week.

"He had no money to do anything, but he had good instincts, and I think that he'll be remembered for that," Byrne said.

The Governor Thanks His Supporters

I received the following email last night from the Governor Corzine. It was sent to all of those that supported him and his campaign this year. I thought that I would share it with you all:

You've stood by this campaign through thick and thin, and I wanted to take a few moments to thank you for all your support and encouragement throughout this campaign.

We may not have prevailed in the vote count, but we stood up for our common commitment to making this state the kind of place where all of our kids and grandkids can grow and prosper.

For that, I am truly grateful to each and every one of you.

Whatever our political differences, I believe that Chris Christie is going to work hard for the people of this state, and I wish the Governor-Elect success, patience, and good fortune as he leads our state forward.

I got into public life because I truly believe that government can be a force for good, and I am proud that we focused on the issues that matter most to working families like jobs, education, health care, and economic security.

Thank you for the privilege of serving as your Governor, it has been the high honor of my life.

Jon Corzine

It's The Day After, The Day After And the Sun Still Came Up This Morning

That's right ladies and gentlemen the sun still rose and a new day has dawned. It's time to forget about what happened Tuesday night and move on.

There is no need to feel sorry for ourselves or cast blame on others, the bottom line is that people were / are upset at the direction the State has been heading and they wanted a change in course.

It's unfortunate though; that those at the bottom of the ship were drowned while many of those who are steering the ship survived the tsunami of disaffection.

Many things can be said about how poorly Jon Corzine ran his campaign but why bother at this point? It was no secret, everyone knew that the governor was going to have a hard time getting re-elected. Many supporter cut their loses early and jump ship before the boat pulled away from the dock, others bit the bullet and stood by his side, hoping beyond hope, that by November 3rd the ship would have righted its course. I admit, I was one of them.

Do I regret my support for Jon Corzine? No I don't, as I wrote in earlier pieces Jon Corzine best represented the values that I believed in; early childhood education, universal healthcare reform and fiscal responsibility are just a few that I believe in.

People mocked me when I spoke of the last one, but it’s true Jon Corzine kept the growth of property taxes to just 3.7 percent in recent years and this year, the school tax levy was 2.65%, the lowest it has been in over a decade. He also provided $7 billion of direct property tax relief to the residents of New Jersey, more than any other in history.

Unfortunately those accomplishments were not enough to convince the residents of the Garden State to give him a second chance. Voters were angry at his failures, both personal and professional, from Karla Katz to his 800% toll amortization plan. When you put that on top of the current economic realities of the state like unemployment and the prospect of an $8.billion budget deficit for next year, the people had had enough.

When you further consider the election results it seems that the candidates at the bottom of the ticket, the local candidates, the ones on the frontlines, where the ones that took the biggest hit for Corzine’s failures and not the members of he State Assembly, where it looks like only one seat changed hands.

In the local Monmouth and Ocean Counties races, on both the County and Township level, from what I can see, you can count on one hand how many democrats were elected or re-elected in Monmouth but not one democrat was elected in Ocean County, many good men and women were defeated and Democrats in those counties are angry. They are angry because the governor did not put any time or resources into these counties and it showed on Election Day. The Governor lost each county by more than 60,000 votes each and it would seem that Corzine lost the election due to his apathy for the angry residents in Monmouth and Ocean, an anger which than carried its way towards local candidates, and Democrats are not happy about it.

I have heard that there is a groundswell of anger beginning to come to ahead and changes are underway to shake up the leadership in both the Monmouth County and Ocean County Democratic Parties because of it.

I say that while change may be needed there is no need to act hastily. Democrats need to step back and understand that while these loses hurt and may have set the local parties back a few years, their loses were not necessarily caused by bad or ineffectual ideas or practices on their parts. All this means really, is that they need to work harder in the future and not take anything for granted.

After all, the world did not end Tuesday night, the sun still rose in the morning and challenges still need to be faced. All that has changed is the day, we still need to make the best of it.

MEMO: Does America really want a GOP comeback?

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
Nov. 2, 2009

From: Nathan Daschle, Executive Director, Democratic Governors Association

Twenty-four years. That’s how long it’s been since the party in power won either the New Jersey or Virginia governorships. Even more striking – the last time the party in power won the Virginia governorship was 1973.

And after losing the White House, Congress and every targeted Governors race since 2007, national Republicans desperately need a victory. They’re eyeing – and hyping – these two governors’ races as the start of their comeback. In their favor: history, political conditions, record-breaking spending and a tough economic climate.

If Republicans can’t win both races with the wind at their backs, their top recruits on the ballot, multi-million dollar investments and history in their corner, that will tell us a lot about whether Americans really want a Republican comeback.

In fact, if today’s Republicans can’t win both of these races, they will be the first opposition party in a generation to break the 2-and-0 winning streak.

So the biggest question for observers of these races is not what these races mean for Democrats but what they tell us about the GOP.

We’ve known from the beginning of this year that Democrats had an uphill battle to victory. Not only is it a challenge to break a five-cycle winless streak, but Democrats are also defending two seats in the midst of the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Despite all those difficulties and with just days left until Election Day, Democrats are in a stronger than expected position to break the streak. In Virginia, the Democratic nominee remains within striking distance, with more than half a million newly registered Democrats on the table. After months of observers calling it a foregone conclusion that Republicans were bound to win New Jersey, the race is a dead heat.

Below is a briefsummary of DGA activities in 2009, as well as a collection of insights from GOP leaders about what winning Virginia and New Jersey means to their party.

In their own words

From the moment they lost the Presidential election, Republicans have been hyping the off-year governors’ races as the dawn of their comeback. They’ve poured record-breaking resources into both races, outspending national Democrats because they desperately need a victory to energize their base after years of losses.

Republicans have been trumpeting their prospects in Virginia and New Jersey for a year, with the GOP’s leaders making the case that these races will set the stage for a conservative revival. On the eve of Election Day, a few of their statements stand out:

“Governors are again key to our comeback.”

-- Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour, RGA Chairman
RGA Website

“The RGA is helping lead the conservative comeback beginning this year, and its involvement in the East Coast races is significant.”

- Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin
Facebook, Oct. 27, 2009

New Jersey "is a bellwether in so many ways for the future of our party."

--Michael Steele, RNC Chairman
The Washington Times, 8/23/2009

“We already are seeing the Republican resurgence in this country, but it is going to be affirmed and we are going to get great momentum from the victories we're going to have in New Jersey and Virginia this fall.”

-- Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty, RGA Vice-Chairman
Politico, 8/16/2009

DGA 2009

The DGA began the year understanding the difficulty of the 2009 landscape and made strategic decisions to boost critical election infrastructure and challenge Republicans. While the DGA spent more in Virginia and New Jersey than ever before in the committee’s history, the Republican Governors Association still outspent the DGA nearly 2-to-1, spending $13 million.

New Jersey

The global economic downturn hurt New Jersey, but Gov. Jon Corzine is campaigning on his record as a leader who is willing to make the right decisions when it matters most. Gov. Corzine has expanded health care to 100,000 children, invested in new schools and trimmed the size of government.

His opponent, GOP darling Chris Christie, tried to run on an ethics platform but a laundry list of controversies unmasked him as a candidate who had one set of rules for himself and another for everyone else. Christie, a Bush Republican who embraces the failed economic policies of the past, refused to release any specific plan for governing.

To help even the playing the field, the DGA spent $3.3 million in New Jersey – more than ever before in the state – with major contributions to candidates and party committees to help them build an effective, statewide, Get-Out-the-Vote effort that can make the difference in a close election. The DGA also made contributions to independent progressive organizations such as New Jersey Progress and the Mid-Atlantic Leadership Fund that spent $4 million on issue ads about government ethics and Chris Christie’s health care plan that allows insurance companies to cut benefits for New Jersey women and children.

For months during the summer and into the fall, pundits all but declared the race over, saying that Christie would win in a walk and give the thirsty GOP base a shot in the arm. After educating voters about his record and Christie’s stance on the issues, Gov. Corzine has turned the race into a dead heat. Analysts such as the Cook Political Report have even described his campaign as what appears to be a “remarkable comeback.”

Virginia

Voters in the Commonwealth have long rejected the party in power in the White House when they vote for governor. As a red-tinged purple state where Democrats have only recently had success, the landscape in the Commonwealth is tilted heavily in favor of Republicans.

The DGA set out to accomplish a titanic task – occupy GOP nominee Bob McDonnell during a contested Democratic primary to give the party’s nominee the best possible start in the general election. The DGA served as Republican Bob McDonnell’s general election opposition during the contested Democratic primary during the spring, earning kudos for “stalking and bedeviling” the unopposed GOP nominee, according to the Associated Press. The DGA contributed $3 million to Common Sense Virginia, an independent Virginia state pac to educate voters about McDonnell’s real record on jobs and the economy, tripling voters’ negative perceptions of him and forcing him to spend more than $2 million before his uncontested primary in June.

National observers, such as Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post, commented that DGA was “filling a critical role – ensuring that McDonnell isn’t allowed to make a positive imprint with the state’s voters while its own candidates bash each other relentlessly.” Cillizza added on May 29:

DGA Keeps McDonnell Honest: [Common Sense Virginia] has launched a new ad -- its third -- hammering Virginia Attorney General Bob McDonnell (R) as a job killer…Says the ad's narrator: "Bob McDonnell: A Jobs Governor? You've got to be kidding." The ad is part of a continuing attempt by the DGA to ensure that McDonnell doesn't get a free pass on introducing himself to Virginia voters while the three Democratic candidates…bash one another…. Polling suggests McDonnell would start the general election with a lead over any of the trio of Democrats.

As Cillizza notes, before the DGA’s efforts began, all the Democratic contenders were losing to McDonnell by double digits. When the DGA’s successful primary opposition campaign ended, Democratic nominee Creigh Deeds was beating McDonnell by several points in head-to-head polling.

The DGA also contributed more than $1 million directly to Deeds, who has been endorsed by the Washington Post and McDonnell’s hometown newspapers for offering realistic, pragmatic leadership, not bogus plans.

Virginians face a stark choice Tuesday between moving the state forward and going backward, especially on issues like creating jobs, strengthening the economy, investing in schools, improving transportation and standing up for women’s rights. Deeds remains within striking distance of victory and can still tap into more than half a million new Democratic voters who went to the polls to cast a ballot for President Obama.

Looking ahead to 2010

The 2010 cycle is the most important election in a generation, as it could reshape the political landscape for decades to come. Nearly 4 in 5 Americans will vote for a Governor, most of whom will have a say in Congressional redistricting. Republicans are targeting these Governors races in the hope of redrawing the district lines and gerrymandering their way into 30 House seats.

To fight back, nearly four years ago the DGA launched Project 2010, a strategic operation to lay the foundation for success in the 37 governors’ races this year. Under the disciplined plan, the DGA is breaking our all-time fundraising records so we can spend substantially more per race than ever before in our history. We are recruiting top-tier candidates in key states. We are contributing early and strategically in battleground states.

Although the landscape remains uphill as Democrats prepare to defend 19 governorships in 2010, the DGA is in a better position than ever before to protect our incumbents, expand our ranks and ensure a fair redistricting process.

Video From The Obama - Corzine Rally In Newark: Obama's Speech In 3 Parts

Yesterday, I attended the big campaign rally in Newark for Governor Corzine. The 3 videos below are of President Obama's speech to all of those in attendance.

As I stated in a post last night, the crowd was loud and boisterous. Obama really whipped them up into a frenzy, you really needed to be there to get the true feel of the event. The energy in the Prudential Center was electric and Obama did not disappoint.

As you may be able to tell from the videos, I was seated in a luxury suite above and to the back of the President and all of the festivities and had a very good view of all the was around. When I tell you that the place was jumping, believe me it was!

On the way out of the building, I was also very impressed at how united and excited the crowd was to be fully behind the Governor's re-election efforts. I overheard a few in the crowd expressing their desired to get out there and "knock down" doors in the neighborhoods to get out the vote tomorrow.

It seems that President Obama efforts on behalf of the Governor has paid off. Hopefully those efforts pay off at the polls tomorrow.

Video From The Obama - Corzine Rally In Newark

I have the first two video clips that I have been able to put together so far from todays Corzine campaign rally at the Prudential Center in Newark. I hope to have the Presidents remarks ready in the morning.

The first video features Newark Mayor Cory Booker rocking the house, next to President Obama I can't think of any other public speaker that can stir-up a crowd like Booker can, so it is a little unfortunate that I missed recording the first 30 -40 seconds of his address. I thought I had started to record but realized the camera was on stand-by:

This piece of video is of Governor Corzine's speech to the crowd before he introduced President Obama. OverallI thought Corzine did a good job at addressing the crowd and making his case for 4 more years. It is up to the voters now however:

Corzine Rally in Newark

I attended the big Obama/Corzine rally at the Prudential Center in Newark earlier today, It really was a sight to see. It topped the the rally held in Holmdel back in July.

The "Rock" was packed to the rafters with Corzine supporter and the build was rocked to its foundation once the President took the stage.

I am working on some video from the event which I hope to have up before the end of the night, If not than by tomorrow afternoon.

Max Pizzaro over at PolitickerNJ has put together a couple of good columns about what went on today in Newark.

Read about it >>> Here and Here

What was so Important That Kyrillos Needed To Speak To Christie 48 Times Between 2002 & 2008 ?

Can anyone tell me what was so important, that Monmouth County State Senator and current Christie Campaign Director Joe Kyrillos (R-13), needed to talk to Chris Christie about 48 times between 2002 and 2008?

I know the two are old-time college buddies but during this time, to make 48 attempts at contacting Christie while he was US Attorney seems fishy.

Could it have had to do with his relationship with shady developer Jack Morris and the questions that surounded the re-development of the Matawan-Aberdeen Train Station? Or a possible "Thank-You" call to express apprieciation for his brother Todd Christie's donation of $225,ooo to the State Republican Committee that Joe Kyrillos headed? Or did he want to discuss details of "Operation Bid Rig"?

Of course, Kyrillos just may have been lonely and wanted to reminness about the old-times but somehow I doubt it.

The Corzine people are courious as well, Wally Edge at PolitickerNJ has a post about it:

Kyrillos calls Christie at U.S. Attorney's office 48 times

Republican State Sen. Joseph Kyrillos (R-Middletown) is part of GOP gubernatorial candidate Christopher Christie's inner circle; some details of their friendship are apparent in a log of calls from Kyrillos to Christie between 2002 and 2008. Kyrillos left messages for Christie at the U.S. Attorney's office 48 times between 2002 and 2008, including 19 times while Kyrillos was the Republican State Chairman, according to a log of Christie's incoming phone calls requested by the Corzine campaign as part of an extensive series of document requests under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

The Corzine campaign received the phone logs late Friday.

Most of the phone messages shed little information as to the topics Christie and Kyrillos were discussing. Kyrillos tended to call after 5PM, and would usually leave a message that offered little detail.

Kyrillos did call Christie on April 22, 2002, the day Todd Christie wrote a $225,000 check to the Republican State Committee.

These records don't reflect completed calls, or incoming calls from Christie to Kyrillos, if there were any at all.

New Jersey Governor: Going Down to the Wire

CQ Politics - Poll Tracker

The latest Fairleigh Dickinson University poll, conducted Oct. 22 through 28, finds the race for New Jersey governor where it's been for most of the month: deadlocked.

In a three-way race, Republican challenger Chris Christie leads Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine 41 percent to 39 among likely voters, including those leaning one way or the other. Independent Chris Daggett takes 14 percent of the vote. The margin of error is 4 percent.

Christie continues to lead among independent voters, at 37 percent, with Daggett at 27 percent and Corzine at 22 percent. Daggett receives the support of 13 percent each of Democrats and Republican likely voters.

The vast majority of respondents have now heard of Daggett, the Fairleigh Dickinson poll finds, but 31 percent have no opinion of him. His favorable and unfavorable ratings have both risen -- to 28 percent favorable and 23 percent unfavorable.

Both Christie and Corzine continue to have a net unfavorable rating among likely voters. Christie's rating is 44 to 41 percent unfavorable-favorable, compared to 42 to 35 percent in the FDU poll released Oct. 6. Corzine is at 54 to 39 percent, almost identical to where he was at the beginning of the month.

CQ Politics currently rates the race a Tossup.

Corzine Up By 9% in New Poll Over Christie

By Chris Megerian/Statehouse Bureau
October 26, 2009

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine has a nine-point lead vs. Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie, according to a Suffolk University poll released today.

With eight days left until the election and most polls showing the New Jersey governor's race as too close to call, the Suffolk University poll showed Corzine leading 42 percent to 33 percent and places independent candidate Chris Daggett far behind at 7 percent. That is the incumbent's biggest lead all year, after Corzine spent months trailing Christie, at times by double digits.

Most recent polls have showed the governor's race at a dead heat, with Daggett's support as high as 20 percent.

The Suffolk poll -- the first by that institution on the 2009 New Jersey governor's race -- is unusual compared with other independent surveys because it included all 12 candidates on the ballot. Most other polls have included just Corzine, Christie and Daggett, who was the only independent candidate to qualify for public matching funds and participate in the debates.

Daggett's support dropped when his name was mixed with the other independents, as it will appear on ballots in some counties.

"Independent Chris Daggett struggles to be found on the ballot, which benefits Jon Corzine, whose campaign is peaking at the right time for him," said David Paleologos, director of the Political Research Center at Suffolk University in Boston. "The poll tells us that voters believe Corzine is the best choice of the twelve candidates and the most comfortable choice of the major three. The bottom line is that, if this trend holds, it will be an amazing comeback for Jon Corzine."

The poll, conducted among 400 likely voters from Oct. 22 through Oct. 25, has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. Among the 10 percent of voters favoring one of the 10 independent candidates, 29 percent chose Christie as their second choice, while 24 percent picked Corzine, 19 percent chose another independent and 29 percent could not name a second choice.

Other positive signs for Corzine in the Suffolk poll include comfort level, undecided voters and perception. More voters said they would be extremely or very comfortable with Corzine than Christie or Daggett, and more undecided voters chose Corzine than the other two when forced to pick. And when voters were asked to name the winner -- regardless of who they planned to vote for -- most said Corzine would be elected, 58 percent to Christie's 24 percent and Daggett's 2 percent, according to Suffolk.

A Rutgers-Eagleton poll released last week showed Corzine at 39 percent, Christie at 36 percent and Daggett at 20 percent, and a Monmouth University poll showed the major-party candidates tied at 39 percent and Daggett at 14 percent. An Oct. 14 Quinnipiac University poll gave Christie 41 percent, Corzine 40 percent and Daggett 14 percent.

Chris Christie and Breast Cancer: Taking Exception To "An Exception"

There is no exception when it comes to saving a life. I know this from my own personal experience, having been diagnosed with breast cancer at age 19 without a history in my family. After viewing a recent interview, I took exception with a response indicating that a cancer diagnosis in a young person is simply "an exception," a characterization made by Republican gubernatorial candidate Chris Christie at a forum conducted at Rider University. It is hard to believe that Mr. Christie can be so out-of-touch with the reality of health care in our communities.

It was shocking to hear the interview with a woman who was seeking the candidate's opinion on mandatory insurance coverage for mammograms, which is a tool in diagnosing breast cancer. Mr. Christie was dismissive in saying that the cancer surgery the woman had when she was in her 20s was "an exception." These situations are not exceptions as Mr. Christie may think, and the numbers prove it.

Medical professionals and patients agree that preventive care needs to be a priority as it saves lives and money in the longterm. Patients need confidence that their insurance providers will not find exclusions for coverage such as preexisting conditions, family history or some arbitrary notion that the patient is young and therefore considered "an exception." We cannot undermine the need for access to screening techniques, whether mammograms, sonograms or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tests, which are all available with today's technology.

It is frightening to learn that Christie would give insurance companies free rein to drop coverage for critical procedures like mammograms. The woman from Rider is not "an exception" and a mandate is not an "extravagant benefit" for "young, single consumers," as Mr. Christie stated on his Web site as of September 27, 2009.

Governor Jon Corzine, along with Senator Loretta Weinberg and other legislators have fought hard to assure that insurance companies provide adequate coverage for women's health needs. In 1991, mandates were established for women over 40 years of age to be covered for annual mammograms. It has only been five years since insurance company mandates have been expanded to cover mammograms for women under 40 if they have a family history.

According to the National Cancer Institute 2005 and 2006 Fact Book, breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in young women ages 15-54. For 25 years we have recognized this month of October as Breast Cancer Awareness Month which promotes awareness, education and empowerment.

This movement has been stressing "early detection saves lives". Many children are being raised by their mothers as a result of early detection. We cannot turn back the clock and allow any wiggle room for insurance companies to drop coverage for mammograms or other vital diagnostic tests. We need to continue advocating for staying healthy. It is the pillar of a strong society. Our future depends upon it. To that, there can be no exception.

Amy A. Mallet
Monmouth County Freeholder

Patrick Murry: Christie’s Message of Change Lacks Hope

This blog post is from Patrick Murry's blog "Real Numbers and Other Musings"and orginially appeared as a guest column for In The Lobby.

Chris Christie put out a new web video in response to President Barack Obama’s campaign stop for Governor Jon Corzine Thursday. Christie has been trying to use Obama’s “Change” mantra to unseat the incumbent, but has been having limited success in getting it to resonate with voters.

As I watched that video, the penny finally dropped on why this message wasn’t working for Christie. But first, a quick note about why Obama was here to begin with.

The inevitable question – or at least the question most reporters are asking – is whether Obama can really help Corzine’s reelection chances. The answer for that is found in two numbers: 87 and 64.

The former is President Obama’s job approval rating among New Jersey Democratic voters. The latter is Governor Corzine’s job rating among his fellow Democrats. Obama’s visit is not meant to sway undecided voters. It’s to get reluctant Democrats in Corzine’s column and out to the polls.

As part of our research strategy for this election, we have been tracking a panel of nearly 1,000 voters. Among the many shifts evident in this churning electorate, we’ve seen a small shift from undecided and other candidates to Corzine.

One Democratic voter who was leaning to Daggett in late September, but switched to Corzine in mid-October, said he was worried that the media would paint a Corzine loss as a referendum on Obama. As unhappy as he is with Corzine’s first term, this voter was reluctant to see the president suffer because of it. I assume he is not alone.

And that brings us back to Chris Christie. From the very beginning, the Republican’s camp has claimed that the electorate is in a “change” mood. Americans were unhappy with the way things were going in Washington and so they kicked out the Republicans in 2006 and 2008. Since New Jersey voters are similarly unhappy with the way things are going in Trenton, the Christie thinking goes, they’ll be just as willing to kick out the Democrats this year.

There are two problems with this line of thought. First, there isn’t a snowball’s chance in Hades that the Democrats will lose control of the Assembly. In fact, if they lose more than two seats, the GOP can claim some sort of moral, albeit meaningless, victory.

The bigger problem, though, is that Christie’s campaign communications folks apparently read only half of the Obama playbook. His message in 2008 was not “Change.’ It was “Hope” and “Change.” Or more accurately “HopeandChange” – sometimes even shortened derisively to “Chope” by his critics. But it was effective. [A recent Jimmy Margulies cartoon about Corzine played off the hope theme.]

And that’s where Christie’s campaign has fumbled the message. His new web video starts out by using Obama’s voice over images of homeless men in Camden, figuratively depicting New Jersey as being on a one-way street presumably to nowhere.

Frankly, I found it depressing. That’s when it hit me. Chris Christie is offering a message of change without hope. And not just in this web video, but throughout his entire campaign.

The punditry and the media have focused on his lack of specifics, charging that he has not given voters a clear policy proposal that they can hang onto. I have said before that despite their discontent with the incumbent, voters still need to be able to say, “Here is something concrete that Chris Christie is going to do,” before they will vote for change. But the problem with lacking a specific message is larger than just the policy details.

A specific campaign promise is, in itself, a message of hope. And Christie’s campaign strategy has been lacking that element of hope from the very beginning.

Yes, I know that the Republican nominee has used phrases like “hope is on the way” and “New Jerseyans hope real change will come.” But listen closely to Christie’s rhetoric when he talks about state government. The tone lacks a sense of hope.

That doesn’t mean you can’t attack your opponent’s record. In fact, it still amazes me that Christie has not used every opportunity offered him, especially in the debates, to point out specific Corzine weaknesses – i.e. the governor’s failed toll hike plan and the fizzled-out special session to reform property taxes. These are the reasons why Jon Corzine’s job approval rating is so low and are fair game in this race.

Instead, Christie has chosen to speak in generalities about how Corzine has raised taxes. And rather than leave the blame at Corzine’s feet, he follows that up by saying that the mess in Trenton is due to chronic mismanagement by both parties over the years. A common refrain from Chris Christie is that New Jersey is broken.

And therein lies the problem. Attacking the incumbent is one thing, especially if done well (which it hasn’t been in this case). But who wants to vote for a guy whose underlying campaign theme is that we are all headed down the toilet? Maybe his delivery is just a byproduct of the prosecutorial personality. But it doesn’t resonate with independent voters who need a positive reason to go out and vote.

New Jersey voters already believe the state is broken. That doesn’t mean they want to be constantly reminded of it. They want someone who is going to lead them out of the wilderness. Not someone who is going to point out every dried-up stream and dead tree.

It’s all about hope and change, Mr. Christie. Change and Hope.

Eagleton Poll Gives Corzine 3-Point Lead; Daggett At 20

From RealClear Politics-

A new Rutgers Eagleton poll gives Gov. Jon Corzine (D) a 3-point lead with less than two weeks to go in the New Jersey gubernatorial race. With this survey, Corzine has taken a lead in the RCP Average of polling for the very first time.

General Election Matchup
Corzine 39
Christie 36
Daggett 20
Don't Know 5

Asked for their second choice, 34 percent of Daggett's voters say they would pick Christie, while 28 percent say Corzine and 24 percent say they would not vote at all. Daggett is tied among voters who say they've heard a lot about his property tax plan; but Corzine actually pulls ahead among those who say they've heard nothing about it -- which is a quarter of the electorate.

"Daggett continues to draw fairly evenly from both major party candidates," said Eagleton's Dave Redlawsk. "However, in a close race, it may make a difference that Daggett voters are people who would have been slightly more on Christie's side than on Corzine's in a two-way race. The underlying question is whether current Daggett supporters really will vote for him on Election Day, or whether they will opt for their second choice, one of the major party candidates."

Redlawsk also states: "While Daggett is clearly having an impact on this race, it seems that on the current trajectory, the vote would have to be very close for his candidacy to make the deciding difference. ... It's important to remember, however, that in two recent New Jersey Governor's races (in 1993 and 1997), the victor's margin was only about 1 percent of the vote."

Corzine and Christie are tied amongst men, 38-38, but Corzine has a 6-point advantage among women. His campaign's attacks on Christie over the mammogram issue has become a defining issue in the race

Favorable Ratings
Corzine 40 / 52
Christie 39 / 42
Daggett 31 / 15

Corzine's job approval rating is 29 percent, with 70 percent disapproving.

Voter engagement in the race appears to be lukewarm, with 36 percent saying they are following the election "very closely," and only 38 percent say they've watched or listened to one of the candidate debates. That factor is one reason why Democrats have brought in national surrogates to generate free media attention on New York and Philadelphia television stations that otherwise tend not to cover Garden State politics closely.

The survey of 583 likely voters was conducted October 15-20, with a margin of error of +/- 4.1 percent.

Beyond Brown: Did Another Top Christie Aide Politicize Prosecutor's Office To Help Former Boss?

TMPMuckraker-

So far, the charges that Chris Christie turned the U.S. attorney's office into a "branch office" of his campaign for governor, as Jon Corzine put it yesterday, have centered on the relationship between Christie and Michele Brown, a close friend and top aide to Christie when he was US attorney. Brown reportedly took several actions this year that benefited Christie's GOP bid for governor, and in 2007 got an undisclosed $46,000 loan from him.

But did another of Christie's former top aides also put the prosecutor's office in the service of his one-time boss's political aspirations? Ralph Marra, who until this month was the acting U.S. attorney, has several times appeared to insert himself into the political back-and-forth over the race, appearing to pointedly criticize a request by the Corzine campaign for public information, and even triggering a Justice Department probe into whether he made inappropriately political public comments that may have boosted Christie.

Let's look at the facts:

Christie has had a major hand in the Marra's rise up the prosecutorial ranks. When Christie became U.S. attorney in 2002, he made Marra, a veteran prosecutor, his first assistant, the number 2 post in the office. Then when Christie stepped down last December to run for governor, Marra became acting U.S. attorney. (Marra returned to the first assistant position last week, with the confirmation of the new U.S. attorney, Paul Fishman.)

In July, Marra went before the cameras to announce a high-profile corruption bust that involved the arrests of a bevy of New Jersey mayors, elected officials, and rabbis. (It was this same bust that Brown reportedly tried to change the timing of, in one of her own apparent bids to help Christie.)

The case as a whole was a boon to Christie, under whose leadership much of the investigation had been carried out. And it appeared to damage Corzine, by focusing attention on the state's rotten political culture which the incumbent governor had earlier pledged to clean up. But at the press conference, Marra made sure that message wasn't lost, departing from the "just-the-facts" approach that prosecutors customarily take in such cases, and instead seeming to point the finger at the Corzine administration. Said Marra:

There are easily reforms that could be made within this state that would make our job easier, or even take some of the load off our job. There are too many people that profit off the system the way it is and so they have no incentive to change it. The few people that want to change it seem to get shouted down. So how long that cycle's going to continue I just don't know.
According to video of the press conference, Marra also declared:

With so many profiting off a corrupt system is it any wonder that few want to change the system? Once again the victims in this are the average citizens and honest business people in this sate. They don't have a chance in this culture of corruption.

The Justice Department's internal ethics unit subsequently opened an investigation into whether his comments violated departmental guidelines that forbid political statements from prosecutors. (DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment from TPMmuckraker about the status of the probe.)

Then in August, Marra sent an email to the U.S. attorney's office staff, obtained by PolitickerNJ.com, in which he slammed the "barrage of FOIA requests" which the Corzine campaign had made earlier that year, seeking information on Christie's tenure as U.S. attorney. Marra said the requests had "unfairly drawn [the office] into a political campaign." He also denounced what he called the "wholly trumped up (and then apparently leaked) complaint" by the Corzine campaign that led to the DOJ probe of his press conference comments, and defended those comments as "generic and general."

As we noted yesterday, back in February Christie had appeared to announce his intention to appoint his former colleagues to positions in his administration, if elected. He told a crowd of supporters: "I've got a group of assistant U.S. attorneys sitting down in Newark ... I'm going to take a whole group of them to Trenton with me and put them in every one of the departments."

It's worth asking whether some of Christie's former colleagues, like Marra and Brown, decided to use their positions to help make that happen.

A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

NEW CHRISTIE BOMBSHELL-NYT: Christie May Have Gotten Improper Aid

The New York Times - By DAVID M. HALBFINGER

When news broke in August that the former United States attorney, Christopher J. Christie, had lent $46,000 to a top aide in the federal prosecutor’s office, he said he was merely helping a friend in need. He also said the aide, Michele Brown, had done nothing to help his gubernatorial campaign.

But interviews with federal law enforcement officials suggest that Ms. Brown used her position in two significant and possibly improper ways to try to aid Mr. Christie in his run for governor.

In March, when Gov. Jon S. Corzine’s campaign requested public records about Mr. Christie’s tenure as prosecutor, Ms. Brown interceded to oversee the responses to the inquiries, taking over for the staff member who normally oversaw Freedom of Information Act requests, according to federal law enforcement officials in Newark and Washington. The requested information included records about Mr. Christie’s travel and expenses, along with Ms. Brown’s travel records.

In mid-June, when F.B.I. agents and prosecutors gathered to set a date for the arrests of more than 40 targets of a corruption and money-laundering probe, Ms. Brown alone argued for the arrests to be made before July 1. She later told colleagues that she wanted to ensure that the arrests occurred before Mr. Christie’s permanent successor took office, according to three federal law enforcement officials briefed on the conversation, presumably so that Mr. Christie would be given credit for the roundup.

The federal law enforcement officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were barred from speaking on the record.

Ms. Brown declined to be interviewed for this story. In an e-mail message to The New York Times, she called the allegations “outrageous and inaccurate,” but declined to answer further questions. Through a spokesman, Mr. Christie stood by his earlier assertions that Ms. Brown had not assisted his campaign in any way.

News of Mr. Christie’s loan to Ms. Brown broke in August, dealing a blow to his candidacy, and he apologized for failing to report it on his tax returns and ethics filings.

Less than two weeks later, Justice Department officials told Mr. Christie’s interim replacement, Ralph Marra, to remove Ms. Brown from acting as coordinator of the Freedom of Information Act requests about Mr. Christie’s tenure because of the obvious conflict of interest, according to a federal law enforcement official briefed on the communications. Ms. Brown resigned from the prosecutor’s office the same day, the official said.

She took a job at a law firm with close ties to Mr. Christie — a firm that represented one of five companies identified as targets in his office’s investigation of kickbacks among makers of artificial hips and knees. Ms. Brown had led the case and, with Mr. Christie, negotiated a settlement in which the company paid a fine and avoided criminal charges.

Allegations that Mr. Christie played politics as a prosecutor have dogged him; reports that he discussed a run for governor with Karl Rove in 2006 led Democrats to assert he had violated the Hatch Act, which forbids candidates from “testing the waters” for a run for office.

The possibility that Ms. Brown may have helped Mr. Christie’s campaign from inside the United States attorney’s office casts a new light on their relationship and on the prosecutor’s office. Federal law and Justice Department policy prohibit prosecutors from using their “official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election.”

The arrests of 44 people in the corruption and money-laundering case on July 23 drew national attention and put a spotlight on New Jersey’s reputation for corruption. Mr. Christie had built his reputation battling public corruption, and the case served to remind voters of his record and underscore that corruption remained a persistent statewide problem, one that could require a new governor to root out.

As it turned out, there was no need to hurry up the corruption arrests to ensure that they would redound to Mr. Christie’s credit: the Obama appointee who replaced him, Paul J. Fishman, was not installed until last Wednesday.

Mr. Christie has said he and his wife are close friends of Ms. Brown and her husband. The couples live a few hundred yards apart in Mendham, N.J.

Read More >>> Here