Peter Tober

The vote by the Election Law Enforcement Commission to postpone a ruling allowing a candidate to use campaign funds for their legal defense in a criminal matter was along party lines: Democratic Commissioners Jerry English and Albert Burstein voted to postpone the issue, while Republican Commissioner Peter Tober voted no.

While state law requires ELEC to be equally divided among both political parties, Democrats have enjoyed a 2-1 majority since December 2006, when Governor Jon Corzine named one of the Republican Commissioners, retired Judge Theodore Davis to serve as the Chief Operating Officer of the City of Camden. 

Had the Republican seat been filled, it is possible that the motion to postpone the decision would have been tied at 2-2 – lacking the votes to pass.  That would have forced ELEC to act today.

State law requires the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission to be equally divided among both political parties, but in the months preceding the 2007 general election, Democrats have a majority.

Governor Jon Corzine appointed one of the two Republican ELEC Commissioners, retired Superior Court Judge Theodore Davis, to serve as the Chief Operating Officer of the City of Camden. Corzine has not filled the GOP vacancy, which leaves the Democrats with a 2-1 majority on the bi-partisan panel that decides potentially sensitive campaign finance matters – like whether Democratic Assemblywoman Linda Greenstein should receive $100,000 in Clean Elections relief money because a conservative group is running issue advocacy ads that mention her name.

In case you missed it: the Legislature actually wrote a Clean Elections law that provides relief money to a candidate who is “the subject of unfavorable campaign publicity.”  The relief package is up to $100,000 in public funds.

Suddenly, the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission finds itself in a fairly powerful position – deciding what constitutes “unfavorable publicity or advertisements.”  This is a fairly broad and subjective area.  Does it require more than a closed-door ELEC meeting without an appropriate investigation? A bad ruling could  negatively impact the future of the Clean Elections program.