Does Lautenberg have an Unanue problem?

If someone a) doesn't live in the state they represent and b) doesn't visit much of that state, how are they supposed to be in touch with constituent concerns and needs? How is that senator supposed to understand open space concerns in Cherry Hill, why school budgets didn't pass in Hunterdon Co., how private and public interests are sometimes battling each other in the Northwest region, and the high price of peaches in Salem Co. if that senator doesn't even live in the state he represents?

From the article: "The concierge at Lautenberg's NJ condominium building in Bergen County told our source that Lautenberg rarely visited the premises in the last couple of years and only began using the apartment again in the last couple of months. The concierge said that Lautenberg’s office sends a staffer to pick up his mail each week. By the way, Lautenberg also owns a $2 million ski chalet in Vail, Colorado." Let's get this straight: Lautenberg used a property-tax exemption by claiming his D.C. condo as his home, hasn't lived in his Bergen Co. condo for years, and spends his time between his wife's Manhattan apartment, his ski chalet in Colorado, and his Martha's Vineyard vacation home in Mass.-- that is, when he isn't at his permanent home in Washington D.C.

Incidentally, a few weeks ago, I did some research on Lautenberg's whereabouts and residency, and came up with these findings: http://www.bluejersey.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7569

One voice, one state: Unite for Andrews 2008!http://www.robandrewsforchange.com/

under the CALABRESE bed in Cliffside Park

I'm 100% sure of this!

He never spends the night in D.C. and he never works any overtime in the Capital.

He is home for dinner in Haddon Heights every day by 3:30pm ; just in time to check in with Boss Norcross.

This is what happens when elections are too far apart. Yeah, he's begun using his condo recently because he has a primary battle to contend with.

Otherwise, he wouldn't be in this State until after Labor Day.

You could understand the Senators from Alaska or Hawaii staying in DC for long stretches. But, c'mon... DC is less than 4 hours by train.

This report smacks of desperation from the Andrews Camp-I am not surprised that it landed here considering how pro-Andrews this cite has become. I agree however that Andrews attendance in Washington is terrible, he is home to meet with is boss and benefactor George Norcross every day by 3:30-there is something to be said about keeping in tune with your district its another thing to be absent from your job. VOters send Andrews to do a job and his lackluster performance and lackluster devotion to it only adds to the case agaisnt him. Congressman and Senators should not have the time to make a 2 hour commute everyday.

If this kind of silly petty nonsense is all the Andrews campaign "has" on Lautenberg; then Frank's in great shape.

Meanwhile the fundamental questions as to the ethical/moral legitimacy of the whole Andrews candidacy remain unanswered!

Why is it that Robert Amdrews (or any of his supporters/enablers/handlers/spokespeople for that matter) isn't able, or willing to answer the following simple specific questions on the subject of how and why Rob Andrews came to be a candidate.

***********

1) Do you disagree, in any way, with what all your colleagues in the New Jersey congressional delegation have told us about the dinner meeting you took part in, at which you all agreed and gave your word to refrain from a primary challenge?

2) After the meeting did you feel obligated to honor your word as given?

3) At what point in time (assuming that your answer to the last question was "yes".) did you start to have questions about honoring your word?

4) What were those questions and what brought them on?

5) At, precisely, what point in time did you decide to run against Lautenberg?

6) Was this a decision you came to on your own?

7) Or were the views of other people solicited?

8) Did other people contact you to "recruit you" to run?

9) If your decision was made in conjunction with other people, what were the understandings/conditions that were reached between you and them?

10) Specifically, what was the content of your discussions with Norcross and Adubato?

11) Why did they support your run?

12) Were any specific quid pro quo's discussed?

13) Or was it just implicitly understood that it would be good for them in the future if you were to become a Senator?

14) It was widely reported that Joe Ferriero was supporting your candidacy, but then backed off when it seemed it might cost him more in the short run than he might gain by staying loyal to you; are these reports true?

15) Was Ferriero backing you?

16) If yes, then why?

17) What was in it for Joe?

18) Was it a matter of high principle that Ferriero was supporting you?

19) Or a matter of political opportunism?

20) If the former; how do you feel about Ferriero now that he's officially abandoned you?

21) Your campaign is thoroughly laced with implications that Frank Lautenberg is somehow too old to competently do his job; did you have any factual proof/knowledge of this before you announced?

22) If yes, when did you get it and why didn't you share it immediately with the public?

23) How do you justify making your announcement and filing at the last minute thereby precluding any response from your potential rivals who would have also run if they had known the agreement was "busted"?

24) You've claimed that the reason you violated your word and broke the agreement was because Lautenberg, somehow, was't holding up his end....you made vague statements about how he wasn't being sufficiently vigorous in his campaigning; but, prior to your primary challenge on April 2nd there was no active campaign (the Republicans were/are in virtually total disarray)....so how do you justify your failure to inform Lautenberg and the rest of your colleagues of your alleged concerns prior to dropping the bomb of your announcement?

Until you answer these questions in great and specific detail; your campaign has zero credibility.

PS In the event that Congressman Andrews fails to answer all these questions it is my hope that the NJ press corps actually does its job and presses for detailed responses. (Wally, that means you. ;-)

From Frederick Douglass

If there is no struggle there is no progress......Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.

As you can see from this press release, the chickens are coming home to roost for both Zimmer and Lautenberg:
http://www.politickernj.com/georgeajjan/19578/zimmer-and-lautenberg-don-...

I can't believe the (actually I can believe) the corrupt party bosses didn't check him out before having him jump into the race!

I bet you Dick Zimmer is out of the race by the end of this week with this type of news.

Dick hasn't been in NJ since he lost his old district in 2000 to freshman Democrat Rush Holt. I mean I would be embarassed and stay away from the state too if I lost in a Republican district to a liberal Democrat!

The rolodex is closed NJGOP! Perhaps next time you should find a candidate who lives in New Jersey, doesnt have business lawsuits and can speak publicly on the issues.

Does Frank live in NJ or what? I'm tired of drive by shootings and drive by candidates!

Thanks, MCJ, for the kind words, and it's always good to meet another Haddonfield resident on here. Regarding Lautenberg's residency, or the lack thereof, I do think it is a legitimate issue because it fits into a narrative: Lautenberg is revealing himself to be an out-of-touch incumbent who doesn't even live in the state he represents, nor is he enmeshed in the lives of his constituents. For the campaign, he's run from any substantive debate with Andrews (the NJN and 101.5 debates hardly count), he's barely campaigning and instead letting Julie Roginsky speak for him, and he offers no legitimate justification for why he should be re-elected, substituting only negative attacks on Andrews instead.

We can do better as a state, New Jersey, and Rob Andrews presents a rare opportunity to better our position and standing in the senate.

You are possibly the most progressive minded person on this cite and you want to put Rob Andrews in the Senate? Explain to me how Frank is out of touch-I cant ever remember you complaining about his service in the Senate prior to Rob jumping in. Furthermore, how out of touch with NJ can you be? Rob pushed hard for the Iraq war. That seems out of touch-long after his constituents wanted the US out of Iraq Rob held tough. Rob is a bossed COngressman with a poor attendance record. By his own account he noted that some votes "arent critical" in the House. How is that moving forward, how is placing Rob Andrews in the Senate, with his bossed self serving motives, and his frenetic ambition a move forward from Frank Lautenberg-a man that has faithfully served all citizens of NJ, and been a flag bearer for the Democratic Party. Lets suppose that Rob wins, once he is there he will forget about Jersey and jocky for a cabinet post, VP, Pres, (or King Emperor Czar the Norcross machine only looks up and in they could care less about what happens in NJ. They only care about how much public money they can get their hands on)-he has been out of touch with NJ his entire career and always in touch with his corrupt benefactors

In many of my comments on the other site (BlueJersey), I've said repeatedly that I'll support Lautenberg, should he be the nominee. I hope that you'd do the same with a Senator Andrews. To be frank, you're repeating Republican memes towards Andrews, though, and I find this suprising for someone as circumspect and thoughtful as you. For example, you claim that Andrews is a Norcross puppet, but nothing could be further from the truth; we locals in CC know that there even was a time when they weren't even on speaking terms. And the independent congressional watchdog site Sourcewatch says: "Rob Andrews is one of the very few South Jersey Democratic politicians who are independent of party boss George Norcross III."

Regarding Iraq, both Lautenberg and Andrews supported the Iraq War initially, as did many New Jerseyans at the time. Lautenberg should not be lauded as a wise voice of reason at the time of the IWR, as he told Sean Hannity that he was "with the president" on the resolution, and he told an editorial board in 2002 that "“I agree with the president on the need to act militarily against Iraq." Andrews has a concrete, comprehensive plan to get us out of Iraq; to the best of my knowledge, Lautenberg has released no such comparable plan.

From what you write, I gather that your support of Lautenberg hinges on legislation from the 1980s, where Frank did some good work on getting smoking banned in airlines and other such legislation. But now, his halcyon days in the 80s notwithstanding, Lautenberg is hardly effective as a senator, and N.J. ranks dead last in terms of federal tax dollars returned to the state. My support for Andrews stems from my firm belief that he'll be a better advocate for the state and a more effective senator.

In the past few weeks, Lautenberg backed out of a debate at Stockton College, near your part of South Jersey. Do you approve of his ducking this debate and others, and when was the last time he was in Atlantic City and met with the council or even constituents to hear their concerns? Besides Lautenberg's refusal to have prime-time debates, I'm also curious as to whether you see his living in another state, like Congressman Smith does, as a problem in the least; I think it is problematic. I sincerely think we can do better as a state than currently under Lautenberg and consider Andrews a superior candidate in several regards. 

A Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!!!!!!!!!!!

I think I mentioned all this a year ago I think he shares the same location with Guardrail Jonnie - You Morons..........

Your glowing remarks about Andrews are a bit much to take. As far as I can tell, he like Frank LoBiondo, do a terrific job of pressing the flesh, but have accomplished very little as far as policy is concerned. As I said, I would vote for his over Zimmer, but Rob's work ethic and (whether you like to believe it or not) connections to Nrocross are hard pills to swallow. To be Frank (pun not intended), I would rather Frank get re-elected and serve one day than let Rob Andrews build seniority in the United States Senate. Rob is a skillful politician in many ways, he works the crowd well. He is a good handshaker. FL has never been great at that, but he makes up for byt being a strong vote against the GOP. FL has long been the champion of issues that fall through the cracks. Frank's service to NJ does not warrant Rob's challanges to him. ROb is making a political power grab. He banked on FL being old and too weak to fight him off. Rob's entire campiagn is based on semantics. FL doesnt live in NJ, he wont debate 5,000 times etc..Rob cant point to one vote that Frank has cast that is out of step with NJ (And I doubt that you could either). I can point to several of Rob's that are out of step with NJ (As I am sure you can). To sidetrack I would point out that when FL was in the Senate during the Clinton years, he was in the minority as well. FL came from a working background as well. I am a union supporter, and FL has been there just as much as Andrews.