Posted on 12/29/2003 1:25:16 PM PST by Ziva
WASHINGTON -- For a low-key guy, Scott Garrett has made a lot of noise during his first year in Congress.
Usually, freshmen House members lack the clout or the chutzpah to stand their ground against party elders. But from his vote in January not to extend unemployment benefits to his vote last month against a Medicare prescription-drug plan, the Sussex County Republican has quietly but firmly held to his conservative ideals.
Unlike some members, Garrett said he's not in Washington to snare as much federal aid as he can for his northern New Jersey district, which includes all of Warren County and parts of Sussex, Passaic and Bergen counties.
In fact, he said, the parade of interest groups -- many from his home state -- that trooped through his office seeking money during his first weeks in office only strengthened his conviction that the federal government is too big and intrusive.
"After three months of being inundated with (these requests), you say 'My goodness. Is that what the framers of the Constitution intended -- that the federal government would be all things to all people?' " he said during a recent interview in his Capitol Hill office.
It's a departure from his predecessor, 11-term Republican Marge Roukema of Bergen County, whose left-of-center approach on abortion and other social issues contrasts with Garrett's anti-abortion, anti-gun control, conservative leanings.
They do share a willingness to buck their party, a trait that in part cost Roukema a chance to head the House Financial Services Committee in 2001. Garrett, one of four Republican freshmen to oppose the Republican Medicare plan, said there's been no visible retribution from his vote.
He joined 189 Democrats in voting against the plan, which squeaked through 220-215 after intense lobbying by Republican House leaders and the White House. But while Democrats said the plan's benefits were paltry, Garrett and several other Republicans complained that its nearly $4 billion price tag over 10 years was too much.
It's the kind of program, Garrett warns, that could hurt Republicans' image of fiscal responsibility in the long run.
"I do not buy the new rhetoric of some in the party that having this debt is OK," said Garrett, who said it's helped Democrats reshape their image as the party that would be better stewards of the public treasury. "I think it's called 'hurting your standing with your base' because your base is then confused as to what you stand for."
Garrett's fiscal conservatism, which explains a Dec. 9 vote against a massive but routine spending bill, has won him the financial backing of the Club for Growth. The group supports Republicans keen on spurring the economy through tax cuts and limited government regulation.
Steven Moore, the club's president, estimates the organization and its members have donated more than $500,000 to Garrett during his failed 2000 attempt to unseat Roukema and his successful 2002 election following Roukema's retirement.
"Our view is that Scott Garrett is the single best member of Congress in the Northeast in terms of promoting a pro-growth agenda," Moore said. "Those two issues (unemployment and Medicare) were both signs that this is a guy who will not kowtow to the Republican leadership and will do what is right."
Candlestick-thin and with a reserved demeanor, Garrett, 44, is not your typical glad-handing congressman. A devout Christian, the former Christmas tree farmer turned attorney is a man of modest financial means. Ask him what his hobbies are and he responds: "my family."
"Scott Garrett is not charismatic," Moore said. "That's what I thought when I first met him. This is not going to be a successful politician, but he's extraordinarily effective because people respect his principled positions."
Most freshmen are potentially vulnerable targets come election time. But Democratic officials in Washington said Garrett's seat isn't on their radar, a testament to the strong Republican nature of the district. As of Oct. 1, the lawyer who spent 12 years in the state Assembly had nearly $240,000 in his campaign account, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
Accused as out-of-touch by Democrats, Garrett was one of four members of the House to oppose extending unemployment benefits in January. He said he did so because New Jersey's relatively low unemployment rate (compared with other states at the time) meant fewer benefits to the Garden State. Garrett also thinks the program should be a temporary crutch, nothing more.
Sussex County Democratic Chairman Charles Cart says Garrett's vote is misguided.
"Give me a break," said Cart, who calls Garrett an anti-government extremist. "There are people unemployed in this county just like there are in any other place. We're a country that gives hundreds of billions away to other countries . . . and yet we can't do anything in our country for our own people? You start charity at home."
But Garrett has shown a willingness to back spending for certain priorities. He has co-sponsored legislation that would put more than $100 million into land preservation in the Highlands region that includes parts of northern New Jersey. And he opposed a budget bill because he said it didn't have enough money for veterans.
Why make an exception for vets?
"The role of the federal government in my view is limited by what the Constitution says," he explained. "One of its primary roles is the issue of defense. So if you can't do anything else, you have to be able to defend this nation and you have to got to pay the troops today and those that have already gone (before)."
Which is probably why we still won't have NJ Transit rail service in Sussex County any time soon, or a rail line from the Poconos to New York. (local issue rant off)
Garrett is my congressman, and before we go giving him all the credit, he comes from a district that is 4-1 GOP and over 90% white. We elected him to represent us. He is there because WE put him there. Hopefully he will do a good job.
Totally.
Actually, there are a few major stumbling blocks to those two initiatives that have little to do with Congress:
1. The Sussex County rail initiative (the acquisition of the NYS&W line to Sparta by NJ TRANSIT) was shot down because of the enormous up-front cost compared to the number of projected riders on the line. Also, there was a lot of local opposition in Sussex County to NJT's plan to locate the rail yard for the line at Sparta Junction. It's the same old story from one end of this state to another -- give me rail service right to my front door, but make sure the trains are quiet, there is no parking lot at the station to generate traffic, and there are no people from Newark, East Orange, Irvington, etc. riding on the trains.
2. The Pocono rail service on the old Lackawanna Cut-Off is an interesting concept, but NJ TRANSIT isn't going to pursue this initiative unless they can get a solid financial commitment from Pennsylvania. The major beneficiaries of this service would be people who live in Pennsylvania, not New Jersey residents.
That's $400 billion.
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.