From a lead article in Tuesday's NY Times...
Death of Senator Places Christie in Difficult Spot
By DAVID M. HALBFINGER, JEREMY W. PETERS and KATE ZERNIKE
NY Times
June 4, 2013
The death of Frank R. Lautenberg on Monday has left Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey the kind of opportunity that politicians usually covet: the chance to give away a seat in the United States Senate. But the decision is fraught with pitfalls, none bigger than having to choose between improving his party’s fortunes in Washington and furthering his own political ambitions at home…
Tuesday’s NYT article notes that Governor Christie, who’s running for re-election this year,
“…was hoping to roll up a huge victory margin in his re-election bid next year, which he could then use to accelerate his drive to present himself as a presidential candidate with broad appeal even in a blue state.”
…But adding a special election for the Senate seat to the ballot could put Mayor Cory A. Booker of Newark at the top of the Democratic ticket, potentially energizing more Democrats, who already outnumber Republicans in New Jersey by 700,000 registered voters, to come to the polls.
The implications extend beyond New Jersey to Washington, where both parties are maneuvering for strategic advantage in a Senate where even a single vote can derail legislation. The replacement of Mr. Lautenberg, a Democrat, with an interim senator appointed by Mr. Christie creates immediate complications for the White House and Democrats on Capitol Hill as they try to push through an overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws and presidential nominations, under the constant threat of Republican filibuster…
In fact, the
Times tells us, Christie’s
“…so eager to avoid appearing on the same ballot as Mr. Booker, according to Republican insiders, he is considering two alternatives to a November election for Mr. Lautenberg’s successor. Each carries a potential political cost and could easily be challenged in court. “
At this early point in the speculation game, we’re told that the option that’s being “…pushed by many in Mr. Christie’s own party would be to name a Republican to hold the seat and then delay an election on a replacement until 2014. This would give his national party an unexpected gift: a reliable vote in the Senate — for a year and a half, at least — from a state that has not elected a Republican to the upper house in 41 years. But it would also open Mr. Christie up to allegations of sidestepping the electoral process. “
Another option, which the Times notes is something they’ve heard from lawyers in both parties, which is for Christie to set a very early primary election as soon as August. The story continues on to report that “this would mean a special election in October.” The Times analysis says the downside for Christie if he opts for this tactic is that it would leave Democrats in a very strong position to win the seat. (Frankly, I think that—aside from appointing himself to the vacant Senate seat now—from any vantage point that Christie assesses this situation, Democrats will have the upper hand.)
There’s a lot more “inside baseball” commentary in the article in tomorrow’s Times—the kind of narratives that political junkies live for. Machiavelli’s ghosts are working overtime in the Garden State this evening.
Speaking of which, Nate Silver has just weighed on in the matter over at his Five Thirty-Eight blog tonight, too…
How Christie Can Maximize the G.O.P.’s Chances in New Jersey
By NATE SILVER
NY Times’ Five Thirty-Eight Blog
June 3, 2013, 8:55 pm
The death of Senator Frank R. Lautenberg, Democrat of New Jersey, creates a confusing electoral situation in the state. There are conflicting interpretations of exactly what New Jersey’s law requires — whether a special election should be held this November, when Gov. Chris Christie will be up for re-election, or in November 2014, when Mr. Lautenberg’s term was set to expire. In the interim, Mr. Christie, a Republican, has the option of appointing a senator, but he is not required to do so.
Though Mr. Christie’s decision could have some implications for how is perceived as a potential 2016 presidential candidate, it may not have much effect on who eventually wins the election for Mr. Lautenberg’s seat.
In 2008, I studied other cases over the past 50 years in which an interim appointment had been made to fill a Senate vacancy. The appointees did not have a very high electoral success rate:
Senators appointed to fill midterm vacancies have fared rather poorly when it came time for the voters to give them a verdict. Over the past 25 Congresses, there have been, by my count, 49 senators who were selected by gubernatorial appointment in midterm (this excludes cases where a senator-elect acceded to office a few days early to gain seniority on his colleagues, a once-common courtesy that is becoming less so). Of those 49 senators, only 19 — fewer than 40 percent — won their subsequent special election…
Returning to Tuesday’s lead in the
NY Times, everywhere Christie turns, the landscape is fraught with potential missteps. But, as the article quotes Brigid Callahan Harrison, a Montclair State University professor and local political pundit, the upside is…
“There are probably 49 other governors who would love to be in the position that Chris Christie is in right now…But it really presents him with a Pandora’s box of political choices.”
But, Christie’s choices, will most certainly affect many in Washington, not just immediately—in terms of the balance of power in the Senate—but, in the midterms and through the 2016 presidential cycle, as well.
If Christie opts to schedule a quick, special election in August, as the Times speculates, Democrats will seize the opportunity and accuse the Governor of “wasting some $24 million in taxpayer money by holding those two extra elections ahead of the regular November balloting for self-interested political reasons.”
Overall, Booker’s in a strong position, too, as the NYT reporters note that he “…benefits from a high national profile and strong fund-raising, though he would be quite likely to face a primary challenge.” The Times’ piece also reminds us that 11-term, Long Branch Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr., is well funded, and he’s publicly stated that he’s definitely interested in primarying Booker.
Then there’s the issue of Christie placating the big-money, national Republican donors. Timing being what it is, as it turns out, the New Jersey Governor was already scheduled to meet with many of them in coming days. And, it goes without saying that they’ll have his ear at this critical juncture.
The reporters play what-if when they discuss the option of Christie trying to appoint someone to hold the seat beyond this November (until the 2014 election cycle, instead). They quote an unnamed Democratic official who states, “I seriously doubt he would want to have to deal with a lawsuit in his own election year, especially a lawsuit that he might lose.”
Obviously, that tack would flame the fires of those Democrats and Independents that he’s so successfully wooed post-Superstorm Sandy.
The article continues on to mention a slew of potential appointment options—with none being a clear frontrunner--for Christie, including: Lieutenant Governor Kim Guadagno; State Senators Joseph M. Kyrillos, who had his ass handed to him by Senator Robert Menendez last year, and Thomas M. Kean Jr., who lost in a tighter race against Menendez in 2006; “conservative” Republican Congressmen Frank A. LoBiondo and Chris H. Smith; or “moderates” Rodney P. Frelinghuysen and Leonard J. Lance; or, even popular former Governor and 9/11 Commission Co-Chair Thomas H. Kean, Sr.
Nate Silver also mentions moderate Republican Congressman Jon Runyan as someone who deserves to be on this list.
Perhaps one person notably missing from the Times’ speculative list of potential Christie Senate appointees tonight is former NJ Governor Christine Todd Whitman. She could certainly self-fund. She’s still highly popular in New Jersey. And, head to head with Booker, they both have intensive, corporate-related support, substantially cancelling out each others’ potential “in-bed-with-Wall-Street” campaign memes.
And, then of course, there is the highly unlikely scenario that Christie could appoint himself to the Senate. (But, that makes little sense, given the practical reality that the Governor has an exceptionally good chance of being re-elected this year.)
But, the authors of today’s Times article note that many in the NJ GOP want Christie to appoint someone that has a real shot at defeating Booker in 2014. (IMHO, that severely limits Christie’s practical choices from the preceding list, for sure.)
One of the final paragraphs in tonight’s NYT article demonstrates the complexity of the choices at hand for Christie at this juncture…
If nothing changes, the election this year would feature Mr. Christie at the top of the Republican ticket and Barbara Buono, a state senator from Middlesex County who is struggling to raise money and name recognition, as the Democratic standard-bearer for governor. Republicans believe that Mr. Christie’s popularity — he is far ahead in the polls — would provide a significant advantage in turning out voters for lower-level races, including the entire State Legislature and many county and local seats.
Regardless of what happens, however, as of today and at least for the next few months, Democrats have lost one of their most reliable and most liberal voices in the Senate. The
Times notes, and in substantial detail, it’s a harsh
“…reminder of how the majority leader, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, must scrape for almost every vote.“
Yes, there are many extremely critical choices for Governor Christie to make in the days ahead; as the Times writers refer to him in this article as an elected Republican in a blue state, “…who over the last year has made perhaps the most finely tuned calibration between the two parties of any politician in America.”
For a myriad of reasons, from this point forward, IMHO, Democrats throughout the country should be paying exceptionally close attention to what happens in the Garden State. As of today, I can pretty much assure readers that Republicans are already doing just that.
# # #
FROM THE COMMENTS: Kossack My Name has pointed out an excellent piece on Christie by Alex Pareene that was published over at Salon this morning. It's loaded with links quite pertinent to anyone wishing to debunk Christie's make-believe, moderate image...
Dear everyone: Chris Christie is conservative
How many times do we have to explain this?
Salon.com
Tuesday, Jun 4, 2013 09:16 AM EDT
By Alex Pareene
Chris Christie in swimming in Democratic money as he runs for reelection. His Democratic opponent, Barbara Buono, is ignored by the national press and the sort of people that would usually be writing checks for the Democratic challenger to a Republican governor in a large, liberal state.
Hugging Barack Obama was maybe the best political decision New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has ever made, and he’s made some very canny ones. I’m not saying his embrace of the president following Hurricane Sandy was entirely cynical, but it was very boisterous, and it continued through last week, when Obama visited the Jersey Shore and once again made nice with Christie before the national TV news cameras.
Here’s what’s odd about this Republican governor who currently seems much more popular with Democrats than national Republicans: He’s quite conservative. Especially for the Northeast. That was, in fact, his original appeal, back when conservatives were thrilled about him: He’s the most conservative possible successful statewide officeholder for a blue state like New Jersey...