Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Republican Split in New Jersey

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Places » New Jersey Donate to DU
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-16-04 11:55 PM
Original message
Republican Split in New Jersey
Hey-

I recently posted in another thread that I am new to New Jersey politics. I heard something about the Republicans here that I would like more clarification on, if you don't mind.

I heard there is a split in the Republican party in New Jersey between my Congressman Scott Garrett's tax cutting neo-conservatives and State Senator Robert Littel, who I am assuming is a moderate.

It sounds a lot like when I was in Pennsylvania last year learning about the moderate Arlen Specter versus the tax cutting neo-conservative primary challenger, Pat Toomey. Both Toomey and Garrett are endorsed by the Club for Growth.

Is that pretty much it? Does anybody have any stories to tell about this split? Is there any way we can exploit it to get more votes for Garrett's opponent in the fall, Anne Wolfe? Is Littel up for re-election?

I would appreciate anything anybody has to offer about this topic.

Thanks,

Erik
Hackettstown
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-19-04 09:57 PM
Response to Original message
1. I guess..
I guess that is pretty much it -- Garrett is ultra-conservative and everybody else is more moderate -- isn't it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kool Kitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-20-04 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Kire, I don't know too much about these two,
Edited on Tue Jul-20-04 11:38 PM by Kool Kitty
but I'll look around and see what I can find for you. Ultra-conservatives don't usually do too well here in Jersey (witness the ends of Schundler's and Forrester's campaigns). Oh, and welcome. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Garrett is the one who...
took over Marge Roukema's seat.

That was a disgusting saga-- Roukema was a pretty decent moderate Republican who pissed off the White House and House leadership, so they organized vicious primary battles ultmately forcing her to retire. This prick Garrett almost knoecked her out the first time, and then she just couldn't take the pressure of another nasty, and expensive, battle. They played around with her committee assignments, too, just to make sure she got the message.

Usually, it's the Democrats here after each others' throats, but there's been a growing wingnut Republican group pulling it to the right. The Democrats don't seem too interested in political positons or theory, just staying in power. The new Republicans are on a mission, though, and are well funded and supported by DC wingnuts and powerbrokers. The Kean/Whitman types still have the edge, because we usually don't like radicals, but I don't know how long that's going to last.

It's all part of the Rove/DeLay strategy to purge Congress of the "wrong" Republicans and consolidate power. If they have to split their own party and eat some of them, well, that's just the price you have to pay. Eggs and omelets, innit.

Sussex county is wingnut heaven, so you can't tell about the whole state from what goes on up there. We'll see what happens if Schundler goes after the Governor's job again. He claims he lost last time because he got into the race too late. Most of the rest of us say he lost because he's an asshole.






Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. 49% name recognition
according to a poll by Anne Wolfe, Scott Garrett has only a 49% name recognition among his constituents. Most don't know who their representative in congress is, and some still think it is Marge Roukema
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Heckling Anyone?
Please Join Congressman Scott Garrett at a Town Hall Meeting


Congressman Scott Garrett will hold two town hall meetings this Saturday, July 24. The first will take place at the Emerson Borough Hall in Emerson (Bergen County) beginning at 10:00 a.m. and the second will take place at the White Municipal building at the Council Chambers in the Township of White (Warren County) beginning at 1:30 p.m.

Along with taking questions from constituents, Congressman Garrett will be discussing economic growth and job creation in New Jersey, as well as the progress being made in the newly sovereign country of Iraq.

EMERSON TOWN HALL

When:
Saturday, July 24, 2004, 10:00 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.

Where:
Emerson Borough Hall, 146 Linwood Avenue, Emerson, NJ

WHITE TOWN HALL

When:
Saturday, July 24, 2004, 1:30 p.m. - 2:30 p.m.

Where:
White Municipal Building at the Council Chambers, 555 County Road 519, Township of White, NJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
7. Safe Republlican towns...
and too far for either you or me to get to with a bucket of Kerry buttons.

I would be curious to know what kind of reception he gets, though. Methinks it may not be all that friendly.

Dunno if his district includes Paterson or North Bergen, but I'd almost pay to see him there.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 02:25 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. I am going to the White Township meeting
I'll post a complete report.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Garrett Town Meeting Report
Greetings all-

I attended the Town Hall meeting with Congressman Scott Garrett R-NJ in White Township this afternoon. It was a pretty civil affair. There were two dissenters who spoke up about the Gay Marriage issue, but even they were civil. So, Anne's worries of a disruptive, disrespectful media event proved false this time. I honestly think I was the only constituent there who ever heard of his challenger, Anne Wolfe, and I kind of work for her.

I took notes.

Before he spoke, he worked the crowd a bit. When someone asked him about property taxes, he said, "We don't control what the town or the school does....They're on their own..... will offset the ones that keep going up."

He said that he is not taking August off work, but is considering it a "District Work Period", so look out for him to be around the area in the next month or so.

He spoke about three issues, in, as he says, order of priority.

1. The Economy

Since Congress passed the Jobs and Economic Growth Package, which he called "Tax Cuts for Families", the GDP went from 2.2% to 8% last year, and leveled off this year at 3.9%. Housing and manufactuing rates are up, and interest rates are at a record low. 1.5 million jobs have been produced since he took office in January 2003, 1.1 million of which were produced since January of 2004. And, of course, these are "good paying, good quality" jobs.

I guess everybody took his word for it, because he didn't use any sources or refer to where he got these statistics. I didn't want him to shun me at the gate, so I didn't ask at the time. More research can be done at a later time. I'm only reporting what was said.

2. Security ("Homeland and such...")

Not everything that is suggested in the 9/11 report is new.

According to the Washington Times (Sun Myung Moon's paper, not the Post), terrorists are probing planes to test security holes and to determine when next to strike.

We have to be 100% right all the time, the terrorists only have to be 1% right to be successful.

Then he paraphrased Ben Franklin about the price of liberty being eternal vigilance. I can think of another Ben Franklin quote about liberty and security, but that's just free association.

His number three priority was

3. The Environment

His "priority since taking office" has been to preserve open space and protect the air and the water in New Jersey.

He quickly moved on to the question and answer portion of the meeting.

The first question was about the Highlands bill. The questioner wanted to express her dismay about how McGreevey was taking away "home rule". Why is she being charged for the water on her own land and why must she give this water up to people in other areas of New Jersey.

Congressman Garrett discussed the two Highlands bills, saying the Federal one created by Congressman Frelinghuysen was much better because it bought land with Federal money and did not impose regulations on home owners on what they are to do with their land, like McGreevey's Highlands bill which he said takes away people's "property rights". The questioner said that this is a dictatorship and her flag flies for freedom. Garrett said "we have nothing to do with Trenton," and took a question about abstinence only education.

"How do we stop my tax dollars from funding AIDS education in Africa that is not abstinence education?" was the question.

The congressman said that he was doubtful that "this House will block, roll back or rein in absintence only education," and that he did not vote for any AIDS relief to Africa for fiscal reasons when it came time to.

The next question was about the Gay marriage issue. He made a reference to what sounded like a "Hostetler" bill, did not describe it in detail and said something about a state issue. I wrote a question mark in my notes. Now that I look it up on Google, the Hostetler bill and I found this on queery.com:

However, Rep. John Hostettler, R-Ind., the author of the bill, said it is more important to prevent federal courts from establishing a national precedent for marriage. ``Simply put, if federal courts don't have jurisdiction over marriage issues, they can't hear them. And if they can't hear cases regarding marriage policy, they can't redefine this sacred institution,'' Hostetler said when he introduced the legislation in May.
The bill is H.R. 3313

I assume Garrett opposed it. He kind of skirted the subject at the meeting.

The next question was from a sixth generation horse farm owner who asked for his support of a bill that would ban the slaughter of horses, or the exportation of horses, for the purpose of human consumption. Garrett asked if this bill would still allow us to kill horses, apparently it does. He said it is not something he hears about every day, but he would look into it.

The next few questions was a discussion on veterans' issues.

Contrary to Anne Wolfe's allegations, Garrett said that his 'priority' has been to make sure that veterans are funded. Most discretionary spending is frozen, he says, but spending on veterans has gone up 15%. Spouses' benefits have even gone up. A quarter million vets will get more benefits than any time since the civil war because of some kind of legislation he is partly responsible for, he said.

Then a veteran who has worked with the veteran's administration for many years said that the money is "not getting to where it is supposed to go". Garrett said that was not the intention of the 15% increase in spending and that he is concerned. He would talk to the veteran gentleman on an "individual basis" after the speech.

Then, the president of the American Legion, which meets in the room we were in, said that he was concerned that there has been no concern by congress for over 50 years about the American GI's who were left behind and sent to Siberia during WWII. Congress never even inquired about this.

The American Legion man quickly asked another question about Social Security. Garrett says that it is indeed "touchable" to balance the budget. The man said it was not right to take Social Security.

The next question was why are our tax dollars still funding the United Nations when the Oil for Food program turned into Oil for Palaces. Garrett said that "if his vote counted" the UN would not be funded. He apparently felt passionate about this because he quickly changed the word "counted" to "determined the decision" or some such more diplomatic term to cover for the fact that he didn't have faith in his own vote counting. I know what he meant. His vote didn't count because the majority voted against him.

On border security, illegal immigrants should not derive any benefits from being within our borders. INS is stepping up security, using helicopters and infrared to detect border crossers and drug traffickers. Garrett is a member of the "Immigration Caucus". One priority of his is to disallow illegal immigrants to use banks on the premise that this is a slippery slope into money laundering.

On Bush coming to New Jersey? Not likely, unless the numbers get better (or redder).

The next question came from the President of a Gay/Lesbian Alliance group in Morris County.

Why do you support the marriage ban?

To maintain the traditional family.

Traditional by whose standard?

It is not proper for governemtn to "subsidize relationships".

Marriage has historically shown beneficial to the community. We are subsidizing that because it is actually the children that are being subsidized. And from there we have to "pick the arrangement where children are possible"

On the congressional bill that passed this week that prevented states from recognizing marriages legal in other states. "New Jersey will not be dictated to by what four people in Massachusetts determined."

"The US Constitution gives Congress the right to determine the parameters of legislation."

Amid references to a 'young gal' he spoke to this morning. He went on to say that the Federal Court will not tell you what to do, either, because they are appointed. State's residents will vote to ratify an amendment. He is upset about the 'judicial activism like you've never seen' which has been going on recently.

Then a vicar from a church in Belvidere spoke about living openly with his partner, and how he loved being here in Warren county. He asked another question about gay marriage, to which Garrett again reconfirmed that the states ratify the amendments, not Congress or Garrett personally.

The next question came from the right side of the aisle, literally and figuratively. It was about NJM, NJ Medical Healthcare, which McGreevey modified to affect only families with minor children. The questioner said "Who takes care of old people as for health insurance?"

Garrett said she had answered her own question, that she should call her State Representative or try McGreevey himself.


The next question was " What recourse in the federal government do we have against the state government?" Garrett said we should vote McGreevey out, but was relieved by a member of of the Warren County Environmental Commission, who said they were looking into the issue.

Garrett then introduced the Sheriff of Warren County, who thanked him for coming to this part of the district so much. The Congressman then said, "I'm not sure if there is press here, but this is the nicer part of the district," referring to the stronger Democratic presence in Bergen county.

The next quesiton was about illegal aliens again. How come they get to vote? According to the voter registration laws, the only ID you need is one from Sam's Club. Garrett's Immigration Caucus has written legislation to counteract this flaw in the Help America Vote act which passed last year.

The next question was about the NRA. Garrett was praised for his A+ standing in the NRA, and why does the UN want to do away with out 2nd amendment rights. Garrett had all good news.

The assault weapons ban will be expiring soon.
There is legislation to limit blame shifting in cases of gun violence. (i.e. blaming the gun manufacturer for the actions of a gun user)
Regardin the NRA, the House is "not doing anything bad on the federal level" he said.

The last question was, with all these people going on welfare, how soon until we go bankrupt?

Garrett said something about the Southern States, and how the programs and services are indeed going bankrupt because so many people are consuming, but not paying their taxes.

That's the last thing I have in my notes.

After the meeting, everybody seemed to move out pretty fast. I pulled up to the Gay/Lesbian alliance leader and asked them if she and her friend wanted any Wolfe for Congress literature. They said, "Who?" I gave them a canvassing handout and the friend asked for a bumper sticker. They saw a Kerry sign in my back seat and asked if I had any Kerry stuff, I gave them a small issue paper and a business card. Upon seeing it, the friend (I'm so sorry I forgot his name already) said there was a yahoo! group with the name NJforKerry. I told him I was the moderator. We had a big laugh.

I came home to write this article. I know it's not professional. I'm no writer. But, I wanted to get the information out to you as soon as possible. I'm not even going to edit it before I send it out.

Warm regards,

Erik B. Anderson
Volunteer, Wolfe for Congress
Northwest NJ Regioanl Coordinator for Kerry
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NewJerseyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-24-04 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Garrett voted for Hostettler's bill
The bill is the "Marriage Protection Act" and in fact, Garrett was a cosponsor of the bill.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d108:HR03313:@@@P

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2004/roll410.xml
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-25-04 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Garrett wasn't very clear
Edited on Sun Jul-25-04 01:01 AM by Kire
So that's the one that passed this week, huh? Thank you for clarifying that, NewJerseyDem. I'm really dumb.

Garrett really mumbled when he was talking about it, though.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TreasonousBastard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-21-04 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. The mind boggles...
but, that's probably par for the course.

I doubt many around here know who our congresscritter is, since he always runs unopposed and tends to hide a lot.

I met Payne, and he seems like an OK guy, but with the safest seat in the country, he doesn't have to do shit but make sure he doesn't piss off Sharpe James.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NewJerseyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 03:13 PM
Response to Original message
9. That is not the right use of neoconservative
Neoconservative does not mean ultra-conservative, it means new-conservative. So, a neoconservative had to have been liberal at one time and many of them were socialist radicals. So, most neoconservatives are actually more moderate on social issues and domestic policy while very hawkish on domestic policy. So, the Club for Growth would not be described at all as "neoconservative".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NewJerseyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-22-04 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
10. The Republicans do have an ideological split
There is the old, moderate republican establishment. They have dominated the republican party for decades and are the descendants of the Rockefeller republicans like Clifford Case. They long were powerful in the state and were mostly WASPs from Bergen County and other NYC wealthy suburbs. However, there are the right wingers that are usually pro-life, while the establishment is largely pro-choice, and similarly right wing on social issues. They have also had a lot of supply side views while other republicans are less conservative on those issues.

This battle between the two sides has been heightened recently but isn't new. One could perhaps trace it back to the 1976 republicans senate primary when conservative supply-sider Jeff Bell defeated the 4 term incumbent, the liberal republican Clifford Case. Recently, the battle had another major battle in the gubernatorial primary of 2001. There, Bret Schundler, a right winger, defeated moderate GOPer Bob Franks who was backed by the establishment. In fact, Donald DiFrancesco, the then Acting Governor and State Senate President, refused to endorse Schundler (this was largely for personal reasons since Schundler was challenging DiFrancesco in the primary before DiFrancesco dropped out). Much of the GOP establishment really didn't want Schundler to win and did little to help him.

This battle is also usually a geographical one. The moderate establishment is largely based in areas that are trending Democratic but are still loyal to moderate Republicans in state politics. They are lead by people like Bill Gormley is South Jersey, Joe Kyrillos from Monmouth County, Tom Kean, Jr. from Union County, Diane Allen from Burlington County, David Russo from Bergen County and others. However, there are the "Mountain Men" from northwest NJ in counties like Sussex, Warren, Hunterdon, Somerset and Morris. They are very right wing and are led by people like Scott Garrett and Guy Gregg.

There is an ongoing battle between these two factions and the right wingers seem to be gaining strength at the grassroot level in county committees across the state which could mean bad news for the moderate establishment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Places » New Jersey Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC