June 14, 2007 - 1:50pm

In an emergency, Rabner can use the Jacobson plan

In the end, if he has to, Stuart Rabner can get around the senatorial courtesy thing.

Back in 1981, Governor Brendan Byrne appointed labor leader Joel Jacobson to the Casino Control Commission.  The nomination of the South Orange resident was blocked for months by James Wallwork, a Republican State Senator from Essex County.  Wallwork exercised senatorial courtesy because none of the five casino commissioners came from South Jersey.  

Wallwork wasn't Jacobson's only problem.  Just months before the '81 gubernatorial election, Republican Tom Kean and Democrat Jim Florio pledged to appoint a South Jerseyan to the CCC.  And Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Stephen Perskie, an Atlantic County Democrat who wrote the state casino laws, also opposed Jacobson's nomination

After six months, Jacobson did a Hail Mary: he moved his official residence from South Orange to his shore home in Long Beach Township, where a Democratic State Senator, John Russo, agreed to sign off on his nomination.  Once he moved to Ocean County, Wallwork (who had lost the '81 primary for Governor and was in his final months as a Senator) no longer had the right to block him.

Still, Byrne had a tough time getting his longtime friend approved by the Judiciary Committee.  Perskie had committed in his re-election campaign (his predecessor, Joseph McGahn, had switched parties to run against him) that he would not vote for Jacobson.  And two other Democratic Senators, Walter Sheil of Hudson (who had lost the primary) and Joseph Maressa of Camden, had also opposed Jacobson.  During the lame duck session of the Legislature, Senate President Joseph Merlino (also on his way out, having run unsuccessfully for Govenor) removed Sheil from the committee and replaced him with a Jacobson supporter.  

Jacobson, who ran the New Jersey United Auto Workers Union and the Industrial Union Council for years, joined state government in 1974, when Byrne became Governor.  He served as President of the Board of Public Utilities, and then as the state's first Commissioner of Energy.  As a Casino Commissioner, Jacobson made headlines for calling Frank Sinatra an "obnoxious bully" after he and Dean Martin "pressured a blackjack dealer into dealing from her hand instead of the plastic box required by state law."  For a few years after the incident, Sinatra refused to perform in New Jersey.  

Not long after he took office, Jacobson returned to South Orange.  Kean didn't reappoint him to the CCC in 1986, and he passed away in 1989 at age 71.

So, to make a long story short: Rabner can always back a suitcase and move back to his parents home in Passaic -- just for the few weeks it would take for John Girgenti to sign off on his nomination and for the Senate to confirm him.

Comments

Wally please confirm


that in order to exercise senatorial courtesy the nominee must reside in the county that the senator RESIDES in not just represents. Otherwise the plan to move to Passaic is a non-starter since Gill's district includes parts of Passaic County.

06/14/07 3:37 pm

Senatorial Courtesy


Senators are extended courtesy over appointments in every municipality in their district, plus in the entire county in which they reside. So Nia Gill, for example, has courtesy over all 22 towns in Essex, plus Clifton and West Paterson only in Passaic County.

06/14/07 4:07 pm

courtesy


The Casino Control Commission and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court: two appointments that shouldn't even be in the same sentence.

Senatorial courtesy was originally so everyone could get an equal share of patronage, not to hold up the CJ nominee.

06/14/07 6:37 pm

So...


how do you know that "fair share" is not behind this Mr D?

06/14/07 8:39 pm

She Overreached


Mr. Democrat is right in the sense that it would simply not do to have the position of Chief Justice held up for any lengthy period of time like six months by one Senator who cannot even conjure up an articulable reason why.

The CJ has the constitutional duty to be the administrative head of the courts statewide, including assigning the judges of the Superior Court and other inferior courts, and a host of other responsibilities that simply must be exercised.

From a political point of view, Nia missed an opportunity here. She has no legitimate basis for raising questions about Rabner. Indeed, from today’s news it looks like she and a few other African American senators, including Ron Rice and Shirley Turner, are even suggesting that race should very definitely play a part in who gets nominated for high office. Anthony Cooley can pour honey from the “understanding jar” on that one all weekend long if he likes. It won’t matter. We cannot go down that road. That is racism, and is simply beyond the pale.

If she were shrewd, she would have attempted to enlist the assistance of the political opposition in an attempt to put temporary pressure on the front office to get a hearing on whatever it is that she really wants.

All Nia needed to say was that, in her opinion, there was a perception that the Supreme Court has failed over the past few decades to properly recognize the limits of it's own power, and she was not going to sign off on this appointment until this nominee was at least closely questioned on his views, including his view of the constitutional provision that, "[n]o person or persons belonging to or constituting one branch shall exercise any of the powers properly belonging to either of the others, except as expressly provided in the Constitution."

Every Republican in the State (and possibly a Democrat or so) would have perked up, nodded their heads with approval, praised her for her political acumen, and pledged to help with the questioning, so long as it was done in a timely manner.

But instead when sources said that she had raised “questions about his inexperience in civil law” the guffaws could be heard three states away! What was she thinking, everyone thought?

Finally yesterday, having finally realized that she simply has no reason for holding up the nomination, other than an inexcusably raw exercise of power, she clamed up! And then, she actually threatened to call the cops on reporters who tried to "pepper her" with questions about it.

Now the Republicans are backing the Governor, pushing for a quick hearing on the nomination, and forcing Dick Codey to say there’s no rush, while he is desperately looking for ways for her to save face from an obvious overreach.

by Trochilus

06/14/07 10:55 pm

Imbalance of senatorial courtesy


Prior to 1966, when the principle of equal representation was first applied to the Senate, each county had one senator and a nominee could therefore be blocked by only one senator. Had the Senate adjusted its unwritten rule to give each senator the right to approve or disapprove nominations of residents of his or her own district only, that would, at least, have imposed no worse a burden on governors and nominees than already existed, however extra-legally. What we have instead is a situation where, depending where he or she lives, a nominee may be subject to disapproval, for whatever reason, or for no reason, and without any right of appeal, by only one senator or by as many as seven, and where Senator A, because he or she has a multicounty district, may be able to block nomination's in Senator B's county, but Senator B has no right to do the same against nominees in Senator A's county.

Another view of unwritten rules:    At this moment the King, who had been for some time busily writing in his note-book, cackled out `Silence!' and read out from his book, `Rule Forty-two. All persons more than a mile high to leave the court.' Everybody looked at Alice. `I'm not a mile high,' said Alice. `You are,' said the King. `Nearly two miles high,' added the Queen. `Well, I shan't go, at any rate,' said Alice: `besides, that's not a regular rule: you invented it just now.' `It's the oldest rule in the book,' said the King. `Then it ought to be Number One,' said Alice.

06/15/07 3:38 pm

There are many consequences


There are many consequences of the hastily-devised system of Senate representation. I've always felt that having three legislators represent the exact same legislative district was more than a bit redundant. Why not have one senator per current-sized legislative district, but then halve each legislative district so that one Assembly member represents exactly half of each Senate district?

06/15/07 10:16 am