Reading Between The Lines: Redistricting In New Jersey

On November 18, 2010, the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers will be hosting a forum on legislative reapportionment and congressional redistricting where Ben Brickner, author of a new report on congressional and state legislative redistricting, will present a summary of his report entitled "Reading Between The Lines." Participating in the panel will be former longtime Executive Director of the New Jersey Senate Democratic Office, Kathy Crotty, Evelyn Liebman, Director of Organizing and Advocacy for New Jersey Citizen Action, and Brian M. Nelson, Esq., a former Executive Director of the New Jersey Republican State Committee. The purpose of the forum is to shed more light on the reapportionment and redistricting processes in the State of New Jersey and to explore what the new legislative and Congressional maps can, and can't, be expected to accomplish.

More Important Than Election Day

A timely Sunday Star-Leger story by Matt Friedman on the pending legislative reapportionment process in New Jersey. Matt covers Benjamin Brickner's excellent paper on the process in New Jersey and other states, which even if you do not agree with Ben's recommendations, is a worthwhile read. Matt's article also covers little known facts, such as what reapportionment costs the taxpayers, and mentions, as much as a straight news article can, the impact that the United States Supreme Court's Strickland decision may have on New Jersey's mapmaking process this time around.

Tweet Linked To Government Run Website Lands Sheriff In Hot Water

What is seemingly a matter of common sense--not to use government resources to promote political fundraisers--has become more complicated of an issue in the world of Internet-based social media networking.

The New Jersey Law Journal reports that an action brought by Bergen County Republican Sheriff candidate Michael Saudino, citing a violation of campaign finance laws prohibiting the use of public funds for political campaigns, has resulted in the entry of a consent order banning Bergen County Sheriff Leo McGuire from advertising for political fundraisers through a Tweeter feed on the Sheriff's official taxpayer-funded website.

According to the Sheriff's spokesperson, Sean Darcy, the entire incident was just an innocent mishap. Specifically, the New Jersey Law Journal reports that:

the series of events that led to the suit was set in motion when McGuire's campaign posted the information about the fund-raiser on his personal Facebook account. From there, according to Darcy, the sheriff's account on LinkedIn, another social networking site, "grabbed that entry." Subsequently, Darcy says, McGuire's Twitter account "grabbed" the information from his LinkedIn page. This movement of information among sites took place without the knowledge of the sheriff or his campaign staff, says Darcy.

The relevant provisions of the New Jersey Campaign Contributions and Expenditures Reporting Act provide that "[a] public agency shall not pay or make any contribution of money or other thing of value, whether out of public funds or any other funds which the public agency may control, to any candidate . . . and no such candidate or committee shall accept such contribution." N.J.S.A. 19:44A-11.9. Any willful or intentional violation of this provision can result in significant penalties under the Act. N.J.S.A. 19:44A-22.

In sum, keep this in mind next time you Tweet or link a government website to your facebook page.

Muni Judge Gets A Pass On Law Partner's Political Contributions from Business Account

The New Jersey Law Journal today reported that the New Jersey Supreme Court "found no clear and convincing evidence that Judge Philip Boggia knowingly violated Canon 7A(4) of the Code of Judicial Conduct, which bans political contributions by judges" when his law partner, unbeknownst to him, made a political contribution from their firm's business account. The Court warned that: "Faced with similar fact in the future, however, the rule we announce today would require a different outcome." Accordingly, lawyers at firms where part-time municipal court judges have law practices may make political contributions, but only from the donors' personal accounts. READ THE DECISION.

New Jersey Redistricting & Reapportionment Story

Tom Baldwin of Gannett penned an article this weekend relating to New Jersey Congressional districts maintaining that those in the central part of the state appear to be the most tortured. Ernest Reock, professor emeritus in the Center for Government Services at Rutgers also pointed out some population shifts that could make the legislative reapportionment process more interesting, as follows:

As for state legislative districts, Reock says districts in Essex, Union and Passaic counties, along with areas of Hudson and Mercer counties, have been slow to grow and the districts there may need to be expanded geographically in 2011.

The fastest-growing legislative districts, he said, are the 30th in Burlington, Mercer, Monmouth and Ocean counties; the 9th in Atlantic, Burlington and Ocean counties; the 23rd in northwest New Jersey; and the 2nd in Atlantic County.

These, he says, may require geographic downsizing with their newer, more dense populations.

Record Columnist Picks-Up On Different Legal Landscape As New Jersey Enters Reapportionment Process

In a Sunday column entitled, Redistricting the 800 lb. invisible gorilla, Bergen Record columnist Frank Hannon picks-up on the new legal landscape New Jersey's mapmakers are going to face this coming year that turns precedents followed during the last reapportionment process on their head.

Redistricting could have even greater consequences on the state level. Several complicated court cases, specifically Bartlett v. Strickland, McNeil v. Legislative Apportionment and others, may produce a more favorable map for New Jersey Republicans. Both parties will be vying to get a "good map." A "good map" is one that gives a particular party a better or at least a fighting chance of securing a majority in one or both houses. In 2001, Republicans got a "bad map."

The Interest Is Only A "Special Interest" When It Is Not Our Interest

In a frightening display, politickernj.com reports that New Jersey Senate Democrats plan to attempt to regulate certain 501c4 organizations that disagree with their political views, compelling not only the disclosure of contributors, but also applying pay-to-play rules to them.

Setting aside issues of federal preemption for the moment, Senate Democrat spokesperson Derek Roseman actually said that the proposed legislation would "clearly define the groups that were exempted" by "delineat[ing] between legitimate groups with a legitimate policy orientation and shadow organizations that are merely acting as a front for a political party." Further, Assemblyman and State Democratic Party Chairman John Wisniewski (D-Sayreville) said the application of such restrictions "would likely be based on the length of time the group had been in existence."

Does this mean that recently formed politically active 501c4's, such as Garden State Equality, which held events at which former Governor Corzine appeared at as an honored guest while advocating its agenda, and vice-versa, should be subject to such restrictions being sought to be imposed against Reform New Jersey Now by this legislation? Who decides?

While on the subject, why is the Legislature still avoiding real pay-to-play reform, such as that long-proposed by Assemblywoman Amy Handlin, which would entirely ban both corporate and union contributions in New Jersey? In throwing out the restrictions imposed on labor unions under Governor Christie's Executive Order No. 7, the Appellate Division held that while the Executive Branch could not do so unilaterally, the Legislature could act to apply pay-to-play restrictions to labor organizations that hold the largest no-bid public contracts in the State of New Jersey.

Symons: Population estimates suggest major redistricting looms

Michael Symons of Gannett reports on the Census Bureau's final population estimates for every municipality before this year’s official counts are released in early 2011 indicating that "some serious retooling of the legislative map is in store in advance of next year’s Senate and Assembly races." According to Symons' analysis of the numbers. . . .

Six districts have estimated populations that are too large, if the estimates prove correct, with another three districts are are pretty close. The six that would have to shed towns include the 2nd and 9th districts along the Shore, the 12th and 30th districts in Central Jersey, the 3rd District in rural South Jersey and the 23rd District in rural northwest New Jersey.

Another seven districts have estimated populations that are too small and would need to expand. These include the 27th, 29th and 34th districts in Essex County, the 31st, 32nd and 33rd districts in Hudson County and the 15th District in Mercer County.

New Jersey Legislative Reapportionment and Congressional Redistricting Primer

New Jersey's legislative and congressional districts will soon be redrawn by two separate independent commissions made up of members selected by leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties in the State.

First, by November 15, 2010, members State's Legislative Reapportionment Commission must be appointed by the respective chairs of the Republican and Democratic State Committees. This Commission must create a map by February 1, 2011, or within one month after the census data becomes available. This is the map that will govern the next round of legislative contests that partisan candidates must file to run in by April 2011.

Republicans will likely be seeking a more competitive map from what was adopted in 2001 that has resulted in Democratic pluralities in both houses of the Legislature for the last decade despite aggregate statewide election results favoring Republican candidates in recent years. Democrats will likely be seeking to maintain the status quo, but could face constitutional hurdles due to the March 2009 decision of the United States Supreme Court in Bartlett v. Strickland. This is very similar to questions raised in relation to New Jersey's current legislative map in 2001 regarding whether section 2 of the Voting Rights Act required the division of municipalities into more than two legislative districts contrary to the political boundary requirements of Article IV, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the New Jersey Constitution. See: McNeil v. Legislative Apportionment Commission.

Second, with respect to Congressional redistricting, it is almost certain that when the results of the census are in, New Jersey will lose a congressional district for the first time in 30 years. We should know for sure by January 10, 2011 when Congressional seats are to be apportioned to the states. This should make for much more interesting mapmaking than the incumbency protection plan that was adopted in October 2001. Members of New Jersey's Congressional Redistricting Commission must be selected by respective legislative and state party leaders by June 15, 2011. The Commission must complete its work by January 17, 2012, which will govern where partisan candidates file to run for Congress by April 2012.