 AP Photo
|
||||||
|
|
||
|
Posted on 10/01/2002 6:03:54 PM PDT by eddie willers
By JOHN P. McALPIN, Associated Press Writer
TRENTON, N.J. (AP) - Desperate to keep their single-seat majority in the Senate, Democrats have chosen former Sen. Frank Lautenberg to replace scandal-tainted Sen. Robert Torricelli ( news, bio, voting record) on the November ballot, The Associated Press has learned.
|
||||||||||||
The decision was reached Tuesday evening after a full day of meetings among top state Democrats, according to a party source familiar with the discussions.
An announcement was expected later Tuesday.
Earlier in the day, the 78-year-old Lautenberg indicated he was ready to run.
"I was there (in the Senate) 18 years, and I enjoyed virtually every day," Lautenberg said in a telephone interview from his car as he headed to the governor's mansion for meetings with top state Democrats. "I didn't like raising the money, but I'm not going to mind it as much this time, because it's kind of fresh start."
Whether Lautenberg's name will actually appear the ballot with Republican Douglas Forrester will be decided in court. Republicans say it is too late to replace Torricelli, who dropped out Monday as his poll numbers continued to fall amid questions about his ethics.
The New Jersey Supreme Court will hear arguments on the case Wednesday.
Sen. William Frist, chairman of the Senate GOP campaign committee, said Republicans would consider an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court ( news - web sites) if the New Jersey court rules in favor of the Democrats.
"This is a desperate grasp at getting around the law and the people of New Jersey are tired of having their leaders go around the law," he said.
Frist said some absentee ballots have already been cast and that other ballots have been distributed to military personnel overseas; the New Jersey Association of County Clerks said about 1,600 absentee ballots were mailed out.
Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., said that by objecting to Torricelli's request, Republicans were "denying the people of New Jersey a choice" in the election.
Five months ago, Torricelli's Senate seat was considered relatively safe. But support plummeted after he was admonished by the Senate ethics committee for his relationship with a 1996 campaign supporter, and he soon became the most vulnerable incumbent in the country.
Few, however, expected a court fight five weeks before Election Day.
"This is one for the books," said Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia. "It will long be remembered."
Under New Jersey law, a party can replace a statewide nominee on the ballot if the person drops out at least 51 days before the election. Torricelli missed the deadline by 15 days.
However, Democrats say decades of state court decisions put voters' rights above filing deadlines and other technical guidelines.
Attorney General David Samson argued in papers filed with the court Tuesday that the justices have the power to relax the deadline to withdraw and allow Democrats to post another candidate. Samson, who was appointed to his job by Democratic Gov. James E. McGreevey, said election laws have long been interpreted liberally to allow voters every opportunity.
Legal experts agreed.
"In a substantial number of those cases, the courts have ruled on the side of being inclusive," said Richard Perr, an election law professor at Rutgers University Law School.
Six of the seven justices on the state's highest court were appointed by a former Republican governor.
Lautenberg's selection as the potential Democratic savior is replete with irony. He and Torricelli feuded openly while serving together.
"I'm not in a gloating mode," Lautenberg said. "I don't want to be smug about this. It was unfortunate for him and an unfortunate thing for all of us."
Lautenberg is a supporter of abortion rights and staunch opponent of the death penalty. He brings two major strengths to the difficult bid: statewide name recognition and a huge reserve of personal wealth he can use in the campaign. Also, unlike the House members who were also considered as substitute candidates, he does not have anything to lose by running and losing.
Lautenberg was a business executive before serving three terms in the Senate, deciding against a re-election bid in 2000. He counted among his accomplishments a law requiring companies to disclose chemicals they release into the environment, a law banning smoking on domestic flights and a law banning gun ownership by those convicted of domestic violence.
If Torch resigns, and McGreevey appoints Lautenberg, fine, he can serve out the rest of the term. And he can be a write in candidate. But he missed his chance to have his name on the ballot, per whatever NJ election laws cover doing that.
Dave Kopel's article on National Review Online seems pretty clear to me on this. Where is the catch, other than a blatant endrun by the NJSC?
Now, if Torricelli were alive but incapacitated, say in Patsy Mink's situation, I'm not sure what would be the lawful decision. That would mean some interpretation of the law, I think.
But we're not there.....yet.
Then we could sit back and watch THEM take it to the Supreme Court!
Careful, Dog, you might hurt your back stooping down that low to get to his head.
I disagree. They are desperate and have no more idea of how the court will rule than you and I do. They only know one thing: Torricelli is going to lose. That's one of the greatest sins of a Democrat. Almost everything else can fall (well maybe not abortion) to the desire for power. Faced with certain loss, they panicked and instituted this scheme.
Look at how many candidates they had to go through before getting Lautenberg to agree. Does that sound like a party that knows what it's doing? Any why have Torricelli give the Saturday radio address when they were going to dump him two days later. Why not give that address to a candidate who was actually going to run for something?
Nope this is the Hail Mary pass from a party that has run out of options.
This raises an interesting possibility. Why not bend the rules just a bit more to both replace Torricelli's name AND add about 100 more names on the ballot. After all, we must give the voters choice and I can't see why Lautenberg deserves any more right to be on the ballot than any other NJ resident. By the way, I'm not a NJ resident, but PUT ME ON THE BALLOT because residency is probably one of those little rules that's needs to be bent like all the others.
You mean to tell me this is the clown they've chosen? He's tripping all over his tongue, it's almost as though someone is in back of him giving him the DEMO mantra of pollution,yada yada yada...I was waiting for someone to kick him in the arse and say "don't forget to talk about the children dummy!"
I almost feel sorry for the dude. Between this fiasco and the 2 traitors in Baghdad, it's hard to believe anyone would vote for this party of ill repute.
You are on the NJSC, and are fair minded. How do you rule?
By the way, if you think the Dems haven't thought about this line of argument, then you must think they are as stupid as plywood. They don't get their advice from brain dead talking heads on the tube. They get their advice from lawyers from Harvard law school that charge $400 an hour in D.C. And I am just a beat up old provincial lawyer in the boonies and I thought of it rather quickly.
I don't think Forrester will have any problem beating Lautenberg, he voted against the resolution of force against Iraq in 1991 and is as liberal as they come.
Tell ya what, Howlin! I AM impressed with the lawless, ruthless, irresponsible, and single minded raw ambition demonstrated by the dims over and again! They are truly amazing. And the fact that they get away with this act so often is even more amazing. This doesn't say as much for them as it does for conservatives and the Republican Party who allow this abuse of our constitutional republic to continue. It is as though the parents are asleep in the house and the adolescents are running amok. Mature folks had better wake up and get this thing under control. See ya around!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.