Supreme Court Deals Blow To GOP in New Jersey Race
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court refused Monday to be drawn into an election
fight that resurrected memories of the court's contentious intervention in the
presidential election two years ago.
Democrats may now go ahead with plans to replace Sen. Robert Torricelli with former
Sen. Frank Lautenberg on the Nov. 5 ballot in their effort to retain their one-seat
advantage in the Senate.
New Jersey Republicans had called the switch a political ploy intended to dump a
candidate who seemed sure to lose in favor of a potential winner. They asked the
Supreme Court to stop the Democrats, arguing that the candidate swap came too
close to Election Day.
The high court did not explain its reasons for rejecting the GOP appeal.
"Game on," said Bill Pascoe, campaign manager for Republican challenger Douglas
Forrester, after the Supreme Court announcement. "Now we've got the legalities out
of the way. That means we've got a race on our hands."
Word from the high court came on the first day of the new Supreme Court term, and a
week after Mr. Torricelli bowed out of his re-election race. The incumbent Democrat
said he would step aside after polls showed him losing ground to Mr. Forrester, who
had made Mr. Torricelli's ethics problems the focus of his campaign.
The Democrats quickly chose Mr. Lautenberg as a replacement, and the Republicans
went to court.
New Jersey's highest court unanimously approved the candidate switch, a decision
that Mr. Forrester's lawyers had said "opens the doors of American elections to
considerable mischief."
The Republicans appealed to the high court Thursday, arguing that the candidate
swap was both illegal and unconstitutional. State law prevents such an 11th hour
switch, and it could strip voting rights from absentee and overseas voters, the GOP argued.
About 1,700 absentee and overseas military ballots have already been mailed with Mr. Torricelli's name on them.
Republicans argued that if the state ruling stood, "political parties will be encouraged to withdraw losing candidates on the eve of election,
replacing them with candidates who have not gone through the rigors of the nomination process in hopes of snatching victory from the jaws of
defeat."
There was plenty of time to reprint ballots, Democrats assured the Supreme Court in paperwork filed Friday. "It may be that Forrester believes
he will be politically hurt by the New Jersey Supreme Court's judgment and is simply unwilling to say so," Democrats wrote.
As in the 2000 election fight, Republicans contested a ruling from a majority-Democrat state court.
The Supreme Court surprised both sides by jumping into the fight two years ago, ending ballot recounts in Florida by a bitter 5-4 vote.
Democrat Al Gore had sought the recounts in hopes of erasing George W. Bush's tiny lead.
New Jersey Republicans are also pursuing a separate challenge in federal court in Trenton on behalf of two people the party contends could
lose their votes.
The GOP also is taking its battle to the Federal Election Commission, seeking to bar the Democrats' former candidate from giving his campaign
money to the party or Mr. Lautenberg.
A poll released Monday showed Mr. Lautenberg had a slight lead over Mr. Forrester, even though a majority said the Democrats' bid to replace
tarnished Mr. Torricelli on the ballot was unfair.
Alex Vogel, the National Republican Senatorial Committee's general counsel, said the party was preparing to file a complaint with the
commission contending that because Mr. Torricelli is no longer a candidate, he must refund any leftover contributions for next month's election
to his donors.
The committee will ask the commission to block Mr. Torricelli from transferring his campaign funds to the party or to Mr. Lautenberg as the
election commission investigates the Republican complaint, Mr. Vogel said. The most the senator can give Mr. Lautenberg is $1,000, he said.
"The argument is look, if you fail to act, any action after the fact is far too late," Mr. Vogel said. "We're talking about whether the Democrats
can inject millions of dollars from Torricelli's campaign into this election."
Mr. Torricelli's campaign has close to $5 million on hand, said Debra DeShong, spokeswoman for his Senate office.
Tovah Ravitz-Meehan, spokeswoman for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said there was no basis for the Republican complaint.
"They're spinning out of control," she said. "They are filing lawsuits all over the place because they know their candidate has no ability to win
this race, so they're trying to win on a technicality."
Mr. Torricelli can legally transfer his campaign money to the party, Ms. Ravitz-Meehan said. His other options include giving it out in $1,000
increments to other candidates, returning it to donors or converting his campaign fund into a political action committee, she said.
FEC spokesman Ian Stirton declined to comment on the specifics of Mr. Torricelli's case, but said that in general, federal candidates and
officeholders can contribute campaign funds to the party without limit. That typically includes members of Congress who decide against
seeking re-election. Mr. Stirton also said he didn't think the commission had injunctive power to block Mr. Torricelli from transferring the money
while the FEC investigated the complaint.
Mr. Torricelli, facing plummeting poll numbers following an admonition from the Senate ethics committee over his dealings with a donor,
dropped his re-election bid last week. The Democratic Party quickly moved to replace him on the ballot with Mr. Lautenberg, a former senator.
Democrats control the Senate by one seat, so the New Jersey race could be key in next month's elections.
A Quinnipiac University poll of likely voters showed Mr. Lautenberg receiving 49% to Mr. Forrester's 45%, with 4% undecided. The margin of
error was plus or minus four percentage points.
"The new Democratic candidate has turned the New Jersey Senate race into a whole new ball game that will be decided by independent voters,"
said Clay Richards, assistant director of the Quinnipiac Polling Institute.
When asked whether it was fair for Mr. Lautenberg to replace Mr. Torricelli on the ballot, 54% in the Quinnipiac poll said no, but only 30% said
they would not vote for Mr. Lautenberg because of the switch. The poll of 514 likely voters was conducted from Wednesday to Sunday.
Copyright (c) 2002 Associated Press |
