Give Sweeney a Chance

great post (0.00 / 0)

I have to think of a witty signature about Frank LoBiondo

---

by: Hopeful @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 19:36:12 PM CDT

I beg to differ (4.00 / 2)

"It is hard to find a single person who has anything bad to say about Sen. Sweeney's record."

A statement like this on a progressive site?  Sen. Sweeney is proud of his record fighting for a race to the bottom for workers on benefit issues (except for Paid Family Leave, which I wish were more representative of his record).  It is one thing to work for benefit reform.  It is another thing to make hard working state workers the scapegoat for NJ's budget problems.  Even Christie hasn't made the same ridiculous statements that Sweeney has made about state workers.  

I don't have a horse in the Sen. Presidency race.  I certainly would like to know what Codey has done and what he would want to do.  But personally, I believe anyone other than Sweeney would be a better choice for Sen. President.

---

by: princetonblue @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 21:19:40 PM CDT

christie v. state workers (4.00 / 1)

Christie said he would do three things if he becomes governor:

1) fire 10,000+ state workers
2) get rid of unions
3) do away with civil service protections

---

by: southernbluedog @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 09:48:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

On Christie (0.00 / 0)

Christie has also spoken about the state workers being good workers and not being the cause of NJ's budget problems.   To my knowledge, he has never disparaged them the way Sweeney did two (three) years ago.

-pb

---

by: princetonblue @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 13:17:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You Serious? (0.00 / 0)

Christie has called for the layoff of 10,000 state workers.Christie is anti-union and anti-worker. He is against the idea of paid family leave.

Sweeney NEVER ONCE put down state workers. All he wanted was for state worker union leaders to begin to look at the need for reforms so that both the pension and the health system would remain solvent.

Once again you need to check your facts.

---

by: firstamend07 @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 14:57:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

yes, I'm serious (0.00 / 0)

Where were you during Sweeney's crusade a few years ago?  Sweeney was insulting state workers in pretty much every hearing held on the issue in the legislature and in his other comments.  

He would have cut benefits far, far more had Codey and Corzine not stopped him.   Those are the facts.  

---

by: princetonblue @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 16:01:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

In the room (0.00 / 0)

I was in the room and he never insulted state workers.

He did not agree with CWA union leaders but he NEVER  attacked state workers.

CWA union leadership told the membership that he was going after them, the membership, but what Sweeney was really saying was that if reforms are not soon talked about then the whole pension system would go bankrupt.

Sweeney has been proven right . He ,not the CWA leaders,was tryingto save the pension and health care funds.

Hewas well ahead of the downturn ,but CWA did not believe him. Now the members will suffer.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 16:28:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

In the Room? (4.00 / 1)

I'm sorry, firstamend07, but I don't think there's any truth to what you wrote.  Sweeney didn't simply try to begin pension reform.  He tried to stop the 1% sales tax increase by placing the burden on state workers with his 15% cuts of salaries and benefits.  

I think that only you would think that Sweeney (instead of CWA) was trying to save the pension and health care funds.  Your hatred of CWA, as expressed in many posts, has blinded you to who was fighting for you.

By the way, did you notice that Sweeney chose not to include police and fire personnel in his attacks?  If he didn't have a personal agenda, he would have, as their budgetary numbers are even more out of line than the state workers.

---

by: princetonblue @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 19:07:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wrong again on Sweeney. (0.00 / 0)

Sweeney told CWA leadership, more than 3 years ago,that the levels of their benefit program was not sustainable. They went ballistic and attacked him personally.

He told them this before the recession even began. He was proven right.

All he suggested was that state workers begin to pay towards their health care ( they now do so) and that they scale down some of the pension benefits ( they now have done so).

CWA wanted all of this to be negotiated. Sweeney told them that benefit reform could not and should not wait. Again he was right.

CWA hates it when they are proven wrong. So they went after him and polluted their membership with anti-Sweeney rhetoric( they have done the same thing with Corzine during the first 6 months of this year,why do you think so many state workers are not voting for him this time around,CWA still has nt endorsed Corzine).

Sweeney is a union person. He respects the right of workers. He HAS NEVER BEEN AGAISNT STATE WORKERS. He has been against CWA leaders who played games with state worker benefits so that they could look good to their membership.

Believe me or not, this is the truth.

---

by: firstamend07 @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 05:13:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nice Apologist (4.00 / 2)

You have a nice way of forgetting all the facts that disprove your theory.   Christie should hire you and you could then tell everyone how great a leader he would be too.

The way you write it above, it all sounds reasonable. But it's not the truth.  15% immediate cuts in salary and benefits is not a way to start working to decreasing costs.  It's a blow to the head.

As to the telling the truth, when you have told us the "truth" of "inside meetings" on matters that could be checked, you've been incorrect more than correct.   I don't know if you intentionally distort what is going on, don't understand what is going on, or just don't want to hear facts that go against your "Sweeney is great, CWA is not" mantra.  For someone who says he/she is privy to private meetings with CWA/Sweeney/Corzine, you don't seem to correctly gauge the meaning of things.

---

by: princetonblue @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 08:56:52 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Excellent Exposition! (4.00 / 2)

The problem for PR spinners is that once in a while, they actually run into people who know wtf they are talking about and the bs techniques fall flat.

Sadly, most of the time, the bs goes unchallenged just because it is so "reasonably" stated.

"First" is either a delusional/sincere "true believer" who has sold his soul to Norcross a la Renfield (see the old Dracula movies) or he is a paid operative; either way he consistently spins for Norcross....and supporting Sweeney so unconditionally is just more of the same spin.

Bottom line, yet again, Sweeney should have waited til after the election to play this game....he's distracting and dividing democrats at a time when we should ALL be focused on beating Christie.   It's almost as if he's trying to sabotage the Corzine campaign.

 

---

by: Nick Lento @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 10:32:46 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wrong (4.00 / 1)

State workers have been charged for their health care benefits since the mid-90s.  State workers have been doing nothing but "giving back" since Whitman got in.

And I love when people like you use the word "reform" rather than what it really is:  cuts in benefits.

The only union Sweeney supports is his own.  All other unions can go to hell.  And the CWA should endorse Corzine?  Are you serious?  After he's screwed their membership repeatedly.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:05:18 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Let's face it... (4.00 / 2)

some level of layoffs is going to be necessary...

The deficit next year will demand it...

That's the real shame of this whole campaign... Christie probably has a pretty good idea of who has to be layed off and what has to be cut... but he dares not say anything because the Corzine campaign will attack him for it...

Corzine defintely has a good idea of who has to go and what has to be cut, but again, fear of the opposition has him staying mum in front of the voters...

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 16:13:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Christie v. unions (0.00 / 0)

Chris Christie would do the following INSULTING things to unions...

1) Fire up to 20,000 state employees
2) get rid of civil service protections
3) get rid of collective bargaining
4) give more power to management
5) get rid of paid family leave
6) replace pension plan with 401 (k)
7) ban public employees from running for office

How is that NOT disparaging to state workers?  As a member of the CWA, I am insulted by Chris Christie.

I am also insulted by anyone who implies Chris Christie is better for unions than Steve Sweeney.

---

by: southernbluedog @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 13:28:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Agree! (0.00 / 0)

The hatred for anything " norcross" on this site makes some people say things that are contrary to their normal beliefs.

Christie is dangerous to theworking men and women of this State.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 16:31:43 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You do realize... (0.00 / 0)

that the pension plan is unsustainable.

I'm no actuary, but John Bury at NJ Voices gives it 5 years, tops.

Another MAJOR issue than neither candidate is addressing.

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 20:02:05 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sweeney had a plan (0.00 / 0)

Sweeney's plan for pension reform ,that was talked about and cried about by CWA leadership, will once again become the blueprint for pension reform.

Unfortunately ,a few years have been wasted.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 21:25:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Misquoting (0.00 / 0)

No one said Christie would be better for workers than Sweeney.

What I said was that Christie has not spoken insultingly about state workers like Sweeney did.

Sweeney didn't have to do it, but he choose to do so.   That's not the behavior of  a Senate president.

---

by: princetonblue @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 21:53:40 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Never insulted workers (0.00 / 0)

False accusation! Sweeney never spoke down to state workers. Sweeney spoke down to CWA leadership for not recognizing that reforms of both the Pension and health and welfare were needed before those funds went bankrupt.

CWA leadership IS NOT the same as the state employees.

Please get your facts correct.

Sweeney has done more for the working men and women in this State then any other legislator.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 05:31:57 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Accusations (0.00 / 0)

Oh I wish Sweeney hadn't said the things he did.  But that was three years ago.  He was trying to prove himself (and he did!).  It's too late for him to try to take back his words now.

---

by: princetonblue @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:44:50 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Let's see (0.00 / 0)

Sweeney advocated a 15% cut in state worker pay whether they were in the CWA or not.  Sweeney didn't want state workers to be compensated for the week state government was shut down.  Whether they were in the CWA or not.  Sweeney has pushed for cuts in state worker benefits.  Whether they were in the CWA or not.

In short, Steve Sweeney is the leading enemy of New Jersey state workers.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 11:15:29 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

christie is insulting (0.00 / 0)

once again, christie is insulting state workers every time he says he wants to fire up to 20,000 employees and get rid of civil service and collective bargaining.

---

by: southernbluedog @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 06:55:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

OOps (0.00 / 0)

Somehow, my response got posted at the bottom of the diary.  Sorry!

---

by: princetonblue @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:43:38 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Well said (0.00 / 0)

Agree.  Totally.  

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 17:09:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

You've Made A Great Case For Why.... (4.00 / 1)

...Sweeney should be "given a chance".

But, frankly, he already has a chance!  lol

It's not as if this is some unconnected guy walking in off the street and being bullied by some big bad entrenched establishment.

Sweeney IS the establishment!  He IS himself an entrenched power figure in Trenton and his reported associations and obligations to the Norcross machine are well known.

Check this out and tell us what you think.

"Sen. Sweeney is wrong. He did not write, 'I'm not running for senate president' in the letter. What he wrote was, 'I, Stephen Sweeney, will support Dick Codey for senate president 2009. Signed Stephen Sweeney.' Unfortunately, I've had to respond to mischaracterizations of events. Having said that, no good can come out of this type of debate, as we have more important things to concentrate on right now. In the future, we should not be criticizing or debating each other publicly or privately, as no good can from that."  

Sweeney said given the bad blood and disrespect that's welled up in the interim - Codey's fault, in Sweeney's judgment - the fact that he dated the letter on the day in question signifies to him that his word was only good for that day.

Frankly, I think we should let this one be put on the back burner til after election day.....but if Sweeney insists on aggressively campaigning/lobbying for the position at this point, you can't blame Codey for responding.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 21:25:52 PM CDT

I didn't think... (0.00 / 0)

there was a real campaign and/or election for Senate president. Don't they kind have all that worked out before the vote is called?

If they didn't, and nobody knew who was voting for who, the Republicans could elect their own President, right? (with a divided Dem vote)

The campaigning really amounts to deal cutting and horse trading among behind closed doors... doesn't it?

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 21:26:25 PM CDT

Won't the caucus vote? (3.00 / 1)

Or at least vote by individual pronouncements? Then, yes, on the Senate floor, you can expect only one Democratic nominee, probably not depending on GOP support.

---

by: Dvd Avins @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 09:07:04 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sweeney and Marriage Equality? (4.00 / 3)

Where is he? Dick Codey is for it and has the gonads to push for it publicly!

Where is Steve Sweeney?


 "don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternatives." ---Mayor Kevin White

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 23:12:34 PM CDT

Steve Sweeney and Civil Marriage Equality (3.50 / 2)

Where is he? Dick Codey is for it and has the gonads to push for it publicly!

Where is Steve Sweeney?

 "don't compare me to the Almighty, compare me to the alternatives." ---Mayor Kevin White

---

by: Babs NJSD @ Sun Sep 27, 2009 at 23:14:53 PM CDT

an intriguing question.... (0.00 / 0)

....that I, as a Sweeney booster, wonder about all the time.

It's worth a mention that his Family Medical Leave act includes provisions for LGBT families too.  EG: if a gay couple adopts of has a surrogate or whatever, that family is entitled to the same 5-6 weeks w. (half) pay to bond with the baby (or recover from childbirth.)

It's just a tea leaf... but it's one that make me confident that Sweeney is gonna stand w. ALL New JErsey families.  Even ones like mine.

activist for hire.

---

by: Jay Lassiter @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 06:45:03 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

So you're gonna ask him right Jay? n/t (4.00 / 2)

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 07:35:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I don't remember... (4.00 / 1)

him pushing for it publicly...

Didn't he kind of take the 'Well, I would vote for it if it ever came up.' approach.

(all the time well knowing, HE COULD make it come up if he wanted to)

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 08:33:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sweeney is the Future (3.50 / 2)

Sweeney represents the "realism" wing of the Democratic party . He comes from a trade backgound that instills a need to recognize a problem, and then fix it.

Families being broken due to illness,then pass paid family leave.

Minimum wage too low,raise it.

State pension fund going broke, address the issue with reform ideas.

Codey is the past. Sweeney is the future. You might not like his style,but you know that when he takes on an issue he will fight to the end forthat issue.

I fear a State that has Christie as Governor and Codey as Senate president. At the same time Sweeney and Corzine would make a great team.  

Let's face it all Codey has done is sit back and think," what would I have done as Governor". He has never been the same since he came back to the Senate.

The Norcross haters on this site will continue to complain,but I remind them ,without the leadership of  Sweeney there would have been no paid family leave or raise in the minimum wage. Also if the "powers" had listened to him about reformingthe pension plan a couple of years ago them maybe things would not be as bad as they are today.

Sweeney is  realist . Realism will be the wave ofthe new democratic party.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 05:16:15 AM CDT

Spinning Memes=PR Hackery (4.00 / 2)

Our guy is the "future", the incumbent is the past....that means that the challenger should always win since the "future" is always better, right?

By relegating any critique of Sweeney that is based on his being essentially the property of the Norcross machine as coming from "Norcross Haters" you engage in more distractive PR spin.

The fact is that political machines are prima facie corrupt concentrations of power:  THAT'S WHY THEY ARE CALLED MACHINES!

A New Jersey in which the machines have been defanged would be a far cleaner and more just and more prosperous New Jersey.

Some would tell us that we are not being "real" if we demand clean government that it's somehow just not possible for democracy to operate in this sate.

Don't buy that line of bullshit.   Unless you are directly employed by the machine (or hope to be someday) then you have NOTHING to gain by voting for a machine candidate over one who is a more progressive Democrat.

If Sweeney were running against Christie, I would vote for Sweeney.......hell, if firstamend07 were voting against Christie I would vote for HER(him?).   I understand realpolitic.

Codey is the more credibly progressive of the two.  To some of us here progressive means "unrealistic"; but that's just a PR tactic to associate a negative trope with a policy difference.  

From a progressive perspective every time "first" calls for "raelism" it's code for give up on any real change and accept the
"reality" that the poor and unconnected will always get the shaft.  Sorry, I ain't buying that bs.

Further, Sweeney is being a distractive divisive asshole to do this in the midst of a tight gubernatorial election!

He should have held his tongue til after the November election and then made his ambitious play.

---

by: Nick Lento @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 12:08:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Sweeney is . . . a distractive divisive asshole" (0.00 / 0)

I took the liberty of editing your statement.  He's an asshole for all seasons.

---

by: 12mileseastofTrenton @ Tue Sep 29, 2009 at 14:50:20 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Steve Sweeney, 856-251-9801 n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: denniscmcgrath @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 07:44:20 AM CDT

"One Issue" Danger (4.00 / 2)

I understand that Marraige equality is a HUGE issue with many who post on this site. It would be unfortunate if it became the ONLY issue that one is judged on.

Codey talks about being in favor but as Senate President he never has brought the subject up on the Senate floor. He is the only one who can do so. He has been in charge for 8 years.

What should be asked of Sweeney is not his support but is he willing to bring it up for a vote on the Senate floor if he becomes Senate president.

That would be the real victory. Codey has not allowed a vote. Would Sweeney? I think he would.  

---

by: firstamend07 @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 11:50:13 AM CDT

You have a point, but... (3.00 / 1)

...let's see what happens in the lame duck session.

The bill would have stood nearly no chance of passing until this year. So one could argue weither side of whether it would have been useful to bring it to the floor then.

Even this year, if Codey is sure the votes are nto there, not bringing it up would be one reasonable course. But I think it will be brought up, and before a new Senate President is selected.

---

by: Dvd Avins @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 13:31:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's funny.... (0.00 / 0)

what has no chance of passing until a vote is called...

Speaker Roberts used that excuse for YEARS (on ethics/pay to play reform). If they were seriously behind any legisation, force the members to vote and let the chips fall where they may.


"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 14:35:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nonsense (4.00 / 2)

New Jersey can't afford all the people it currently employs.  With the $10 billion deficit this coming year, it will have to lay-off many of the good, hard-working state workers.   It is not insulting to face reality.  New Jersey cannot currently afford to do everything it wants to do in state government.   The job cuts will be tragic and painful, but it's hard to see how they can be avoided.  

On the other hand, Sweeney compared state workers to leeches sucking the blood from NJ's taxpayers.  Rather than try to reform NJ's government, he simply wanted everyone to work for less money.  Please note, he didn't ask this of his own union-members, nor of police and fire personnel.  It was only the other state workers.  There was no fiscal reason for this choice.  It was personal preference on Sweeney's part.  And that is the problem with Sweeney and the Norcross machine.  If you're not part of their group, i.e. you don't pay tribute to the leader, then you're going to get run over by the machine.

---

by: princetonblue @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 08:42:30 AM CDT

www.inthelobby.net (0.00 / 0)

is already reporting that Sweeney is in.. Codey is out... the endorsement of Oliver for Speaker of the assembly sews it all up...

"Where ever you go, there you are." - Buckaroo Bonzai

---

by: William Weber (WjcW) @ Wed Sep 30, 2009 at 12:22:04 PM CDT