In Heart of Jersey Rothman Rhetoric Sours Fair Fight
by Scott Crass
In the interest of full disclosure, I am a Pascrell supporter. Therefore, if someone were to say, “he’s biased,” I couldn’t disagree. However, I believe that to a neutral observer, my profile of the dynamics of this race is on the mark.
Today is a day for two gargantuan member vs.member House races. One is taking place on the west coast between Howard Berman and Brad Sherman, a contest that I wrote extensively about several weeks ago. Not to be out done, the east coast is getting in on the festivities as well. Unlike their California comrades, the contest between New Jerseyans Bill Pascrell and Steve Rothman has not consumed nearly as much money as their California comrades. But in a similarity, the Jersey duo are well-respected members whose battle has forced colleagues and voters to choose between two very different personalities that didn’t have to happen. And Rothman, deservedly, has been on the receiving end of much of the disclosure.
Welcome to Northern New Jersey. A place where blue is synonomous not with the Democrats, but the Giants. A land where people “don’t stop believing,” not for dreams to come true, but for the Soprano’s. The 9th Congressional district is what one could easily find in the dictionary next to “Melting Pot. “ For this territory encompasses all ethnicities.
The Paterson working class gives way to more comfortable Passaic suburbs, and the Jewish, blue-collar professionals of Bergen County are surrounded by scrappy, gritty towns where heritage is pride, and outsiders can be spotted a mile away. And for all of the differences in culture, the one trait that typifies the area is the New York City commuters and the traffic going to.
It is those characteristics that converge the personalities of two longtime and durable Congressman who are fighting for a seat.
Bill Pascrell, 75, and Steve Rothman, 59, were elected to Congress the same year, sparing torn voters at least one slugfest: that of seniority. But style is another matter. Pascrell is a scrappy, down’n’dirty pol, son of Italian immigrants, perhaps the most faithful son of the once vibrant Paterson since the former Governor for whom the city was named. Pascrell doesn’t have an enemy in the House. Indeed, many count him as their best friends.
His plain speaking style can be blunt, as his dismissal of scholarly, linguistic language makes colleagues at ease around him, which makes working across the aisle for the Ways&Means member come naturally. His ordinary person speak has made it all the way up to ex-White House Press secretary Robert Gibbs. For Pascrell calls himself a “fighter,” and that has become his rallying cry for the campaign.
Rothman is not unliked either — in fact the respect he enjoys is strong, but beloved would be a stretch. His intelligence is first-rate, as is his ability to resonate with all voters of all economic and ethnic backgrounds in his district, and his seat on the Appropriations Committee has allowed him to deliver. But he is a more muted figure, who conquers more through an intensity, along with a quick wit and sarcasm. That can be off-putting but it gets the job done. But if some succeed by exuberance and others by even keel, so is the essence of Pascrell and Rothman.
Like California, the matchup resulted from a redistricting panel, though unlike the independent commission that governed the “Golden State’s” process, a tie-breaker decided which of the partisan plans would be used for New Jersey’s Congressional races for the ensuing decade. That person had to be approved by both parties and the individual was John Farmer, a former Attorney general in the Whitman administration, but one who’s Independent registration and his belief in competition convinced Democrats that he would be a fair arbitrator of the competing plans.
No sooner did Farmer side with the Republicans that Democratic strategists faced, ‘I told you so’s,’ from party regulars. A bill of goods it was – neutral commentators said as much, but a race against each other it did not have to be.
The assumption on the eve of Farmer’s vote was that Rothman would indeed be the odd Democrat out, but that, he would at least have a decent shot to keep his seat in Congress. The reason; he would be paired with Scott Garrett, a conservative from the Sussex County hills with a Libertarian streak, who routinely underperformed in his district because of agita his positions gave Bergen County moderates.
But if there were to be a Garrett/Rothman matchup, Republicans coyly decided to make it as Garrett friendly as possible.
Their plan moved Englewood ,where Rothman was once Mayor into Pascrell’s Passaic County anchored district, leaving his home town of Fair Lawn with Garrett. Pascrell is a scrappy, long-time pol, and also, at that time, one of Rothman’s closest friends and weekly dinner partners. But when the lines came out, he was suddenly in a district that was 54% Rothman’s and 43% his. Conversely, only 21% of Rothman’s district would adjoin Garrett’s, whose turf did get 3% more Democratic, but still remain unmistakably Republican.
That left Rothman with a choice.
Try to beat Garrett or go where more of his constituents were, even if it meant likely sacrificing a friendship. To the dismay of nearly every state and national Democrat, Rothman chose the latter. He called Pascrell days before Christmas, told him he “loved’ him, but that the challenge would go forward.
Those who know both men begged Rothman to change his mind. Democrats argued that aside from gaining Democrats, Garrett lost much of Warren County, which is doctrinaire Republicans, and that,. Though Sussex remained, much of the other areas were moderate, where many would opt for Rothman. And they noted that while Obama took just 45% in the old district, he’d sit at 48% in the new, but that Garrett’s inability to win over anything less than the doctrinaire conservatives would provide a crucial difference between he and John McCain, thus providing the margin of difference.
Rothman was reportedly offered $1 million from Democratic Congressional Committee Chair Steve Israel to challenge Garrett. He replied that he understood why people wanted him to challenge Garrett, but that he wouldn’t have done it for even more.
Hence the point. It’s not just Rothman’s challenge to Pascrell that rubbed folks wrong. It’s the tenor. A race between two friends has become vituperative. The first hint came at a Bergen reorganization event on New Year’s Day, where Rothman, presiding over the ceremony, glanced at Pascrell in the crowd and extended a ‘welcome to visiting dignitaries.”
Aware that both voting records were similar, Rothman essentially framed himself as the progressive and the “real Democrat.” An early shot was his accusation that ”not every Democrat was on board’ the fight for the healthcare reform act because Pascrell was publicly advocating discarding key components. But Pascrell claims the bill was in danger of being lost and that, he was trying to save it.
Pascrell fought back by hammering Rothman from running away from a fight with Garrett. His ads featured tea-party rhetoric, with Pascrell vowing to fight it at every turn. He told Rothman “if you can’t stand up to the tea-party in the 5th district of New Jersey, how are you going to do it in Washington DC..”
Rothman ‘s final ad, a game-show called, “A Republican or Bill Pascrell,”also caused backlash. Among other things, Rothman quoted Pascrell as saying accepting gay marriage would make the Democrats “a fringe party” (Pascrell recently proclaimed his support of same-sex marriage). And he accused him of voting ”against a woman’s right to choose 18 times” (NARAL does back Rothman). In actuality, it was Partial Birth abortions that Pascrell had opposed. He also attacked Pascrell on tax issues. That led the Star-Ledger, in backing Pascrell,to say the quotes were “spliced in from unrelated conversations and made to look like he was discussing taxes.”
Right or wrong, it’s not unusual for the truth to be stretched in ads. But Rothman has so distorted Pascrell’s stance on issues that he makes Karl Rove look like an amateur – not to mention the Pope.
Bill Clinton expressed his displeasure as well. It was long assumed that the ex-President would lend his backing to Pascrell, reciprocating his early support of Hillary’s Presidential bid (Rothman was one of New Jersey’s most steadfast backers of OBAMA0. Clinton made a late appearance for Pascrell, and didn’t hesitate to go after Rothman, saying, “we’re supposed to hate each other to disagree. That is wrong.” Pascrell used audio of Clinton’s robo-calls in his final ad.
But Rothman was ready to respond and his name was Obama. The morning of Clinton’s appearance , Rothman paid a visit to the White House and sought to cash-in-his chips for his earlier backing. The result was a walk on the White House colonnade with the President. For all intents and purposes, the walk was the closest thing to an endorsement any head of a political party could deliver between two sitting members. But Rothman, in artful phrasing, touted it as the real thing, saying he was honored to have the “endorsement,’ and claiming “”The president invited me to the Oval Office to express his support. One doesn’t invite oneself. “ White House officials emphasized that Obama was not backing Rothman, only saying Obama was”appreciative of the solid working relationship that they’ve enjoyed while the president has been in office.”
The Pascrell/Rothman battle is similar to another member/member matchup in 1992,where a remap (again the result of a Republican plan),pitted two one-time friends and Dem.allies together: Chicagoans, Marty Russo and Bill Lipinski.
In this case, there was a seniority difference, as Russo was a ‘Watergate baby,’ and Lipinski came along in 1982. But the two do share character similarities with Pascrell and Rothman, namely the fact that despite his shorter tenure, it was Lipinski who was older. Russo was a slick Ways&Means insider who chose to challenge Lipinski, rather than another Congressman,George Sangmeister,because much of his turf was in Lipinski’s new district.
Lipinski was clearly put off by the challenge, saying’if we’re such good friends, why is he running against me.” Lipinski, a long-influential Chicago ward-leader, prided himself for living in a Chicago row-house, calling himself ’Bungalow Bill.” He hit Russo for Congressional junkets, and for owning a foreign car. Despite Russo’s advantage, Lipinski won 58-37%.
Will that be the result here? T
he election promises to go down-to-the-wire. Rothman has won some support from Passaic County officials – notably Paterson Mayor Jeff Jones and Passaic Council President/Assemblyman Gary Schaer. But there’s little evidence that Rothman is cutting into Pascrell’s support among Passaic’s rank’n’file. Pascrell on the other hand did penetrate his colleague’s base at the Bergen County convention, but Rothman still won by a comfortable margin. Hudson County, only a sliver of which falls into the 9th, is considered up for grabs, though Pascrell does have the support of one of the county’s most powerful and feared pol, Brian Stack. Both parties have first-rate GOTV operations.
Pascrell is hoping that voters will see that there is only one Pascrell in a sea of many Rothman’s. His opponent hopes his long familiarity to Bergen County will be enough to carry the day.
It’s not clear how much backlash Rothman has ensued but one thing is certain. Even if he survives politically, there will be scars, and it’s not clear that Rothman can ever retain the credibility with his colleagues. Certainly, his statewide prospects, which would’ve accelerated had he taken the Garrett challenge, have diminished greatly.
But the sad thing is the cynicism it has created. Folks are disgusted enough by the bickering between two parties, but when it happens between two friends and allies, that’s a hard one to swallow. And to call it unnecessary is an understatement.
Scott Crass writes: “Punditry has long been my passion and I thrive on offering non-partisan commentary on upcoming elections with historical perspectives .From Maine to Maui, no election is too obscure and there’s not a character I don’t dissect. I call the races as I see them as I see them, even if it’s contrary to what I want to see happen. And for us political junkies and then some, it’s never too early. And if you can’t tell which side I’m on, I’m doing a heck of a job. Check out my analysis on twitter.com/crasspolitical.