 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.
He's certainly received "face-time" and impressed me. Maybe New Jerseyites (sp?) will just do the right thing and save our angst.
Not only that, even a partisan like Matthews indicated that Forrester would win because he's been around the track and actually won this year's primary.
Forrester will have legitimacy in the eyes of the electorate. Therein lies the difference. Lautenberg was picked because he can write a check and has name recognition. However, I think New Jerseyites will look at this the same way New Yorkers looked at Giuliani's attempt to hold on to power at the end of last year.
They won't like it.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
In terms of jurisdiction, a Senate election is not a “local” race. The 17th amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof.” The states do not have the power to negate that statement.
The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
If absentee voters, including military personnel, are denied their right to cast a valid ballot, because the NJ Supreme Court arbitrarily negates a standing election law, that would certainly give the US Supreme Court a reason to nullify the NJ SC decision.
Sure! Why not?
Great idea!! (Me, I find the crock pot to be a big help...and casseroles. As for cleaning, it's the ole FReep, dust, FReep, vacuum, FReep, etc)
Daschle already smirked through a news conference saying: "I can't believe Republicans would deny the people of New Jersey a choice".
Oh, how I hate how following the law always makes us look bad.
When you have accumulated enough money and status to mingle with the Bush's,the Kennedy's,the Clintons,the Dodds,and the other political elites. Laws are for me and thee,not for the ruling class.
. But I simply cannot envision the faintest legal doctrine they can find to override the law.
I invite you to read any court decision upholding most any gun control law.
FReegards, amigo.
I think I heard on Brit Hume's show that a few counties have already received absentee ballots back (votes).
How can they change the candidates now?
If the law no longer applies to those make the laws, the republic has died. I know it sounds crazy, but could we be witnessing the end of American democracy over the past 2 years. I never thought I would see this day. No...I am not gonna start talking about black helicopters, etc, but when we see such a blantant assault on the law, by people who swear an oath to uphold the law, what else are we to believe? Sadly, most Americans could give a d@mn about who is on the ballot legally....they're too busy watching tv to find out who gets kicked of the island this week....
No way, no way. I watched my father wrap Mom around his little finger for 18 years, just because he didn't know how to boil water and wasn't interested in learning how. (Of course, there were advantages to this for us kids when we were growing up - when Mom was late getting home from work, we got chocolate cake, cookies, and ice cream for supper when Dad was home).
Hand Hubby a can opener and a Sam's card and tell him to get ta steppin' - in the kitchen. Tell him its "survival training" ;)
After all...which party started using the phrase "no controlling legal authority" as practically a campaign slogan?
If that's true that should be all she wrote.
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.