Lautenberg's proposal is more modest. Called the Mr. Smith Bill (Lautenberg brought a cardboard image of Jimmy Stewart from the film to the hearing), the bill would allow the Senate majority leader to call an immediate cloture vote as long as there is no discussion occurring on the Senate floor and the deadline for amendments has passed. This would force filibusters to actually be conducted on the floor -- hence the "Mr. Smith" moniker -- if the opposition wants to take advantage of the two-day "ripening period" before the Senate can vote to end a filibuster...
Committee Chairman Chuck Schumer was enthusiastic about Lautenberg's plan, calling it "ingenious,"
Obviously when your "side" is in the minority the filibuster seems attractive, and both sides have made ample use of it, but there's really no argument that its routine use is a very recent invention, one that has no basis in the Constitution. One expert presented statistics that showed a remarkable change around the 1993-1995 Congress.
Unfortunately, it is pretty disturbing to see that one official believed Lautenberg's proposal was poorly written:
Rybicki had a point to make, and a persuasive one: the Lautenberg and Bennet proposals are too vague. For example, Lautenberg's proposal works by allowing the majority leader to "move the question" on cloture. Rybicki noted that there is no such motion in the Senate rules. It is clear enough what Lautenberg meant, but the bill as written would be hard to implement.
Frankly I can't help but worry that the proposal was never intended to go into effect and is nothing . On the other hand, there's a lot of negotiations ahead so perhaps it's silly to nitpick a proposal at this stage.
The climate bill blame game has begun. When I first started writing this post about the so-called death of the climate bill, I literally pointed the finger at just about everyone, including myself. The anger poured out, and I was frank in my assessment as well as unforgiving in the motives behind this latest setback.
After I was done with my self-loathing tantrum, the kids ran in the door from camp and I was swept up in the lovely reality of my family's banter. It is summer, so the pace in our home is a bit more relaxed in the evening. We aren't quite as quick to rush through dinner, toss the kids in a bath, and then march them off to bed. Ice cream and extra cuddles are relished, and I am reminded each year at this time why I do this job.
Later, after progeny were tucked in, I went back to my draft blog post to spruce it up. I reread my rage, disappointment, and irrational ramblings and was embarrassed. And I asked myself "What good is all this blame going to do?"
At the end of the day, it is my kids - and your kids - who lose when we implode. If you think kids have a lot to say about their parents now on Dr. Phil, can you imagine what our children will say in 50 years should we fail to get our act together?
The country should be ready for this. The facts are on our side. As we witness the worst industry-caused environmental catastrophe in our history, the worst coal mining disaster in 40 years, and sweat through the hottest first 6 months of any year on record, it is clear that there's never been a more urgent time to move forward with a smart clean energy and climate plan.
Unfortunately, the politicians just aren't there. At every juncture during this debate, a minority, led by the Republican leadership and supported by a few impressionable (I might say pathetic) Democrats, has obstructed the opportunity to solve America's energy problems, preferring to leave the worst polluters and the big petro-dictators in control of our energy policy, while tax-payers are forced to pay for their messes.
Oopsy... there goes that blame again. Let's focus on what we can do next.
Hope is not lost. Of course, the closer we get to the midterm elections, the more challenging passing a bill becomes. Still, it's not impossible. In fact, the Senate has passed almost every single bedrock environmental law in the fall of an election year or in the "lame duck" session following an election. Here are just a few examples:
o Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) - 1996 Amendments: 8/6/96
o Food Quality Protection Act: 8/3/96
o Energy Policy Act of 1992: 10/24/92
o Clean Air Act of 1990: 11/15/90
o SDWA - 1986 Amendments: 6/19/86
o CERCLA (Superfund): House 9/23/80, Senate 11/24/80, POTUS 12/11/80
o Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA): 10/21/76
o Toxic Substances & Control Act (TSCA): 10/11/76
o SDWA: 12/16/74
o Clean Water Act: 10/18/72
o Establishment of the EPA: first proposed 7/9/70, established 12/2/70
o National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): 1/1/70
o The Wilderness Act: 9/3/64
As this list demonstrates, the Senate and the environmental movement are no strangers to passing major legislation right before - or just after - an election.
I don't want to overpromise success. This is an uphill battle. But if you and I show up to every town hall, rally, spaghetti dinner, and other rituals of election year and fight for our kids... fight for our country... fight for our America... we can turn the tide. Without that kind of passion, we will all lose. That's an outcome we must try hard to avoid, on behalf of people, communities, large and small businesses - oh, and our kids, sleeping peacefully or playing happily around the country.
In the meantime, we must also protect what we already have, like a plethora of state laws and the federal Clean Air Act. I recommend reading David Doniger's blog on Switchboard today that really outlines how we can make progress with the tools we have right now.
In coming weeks and months, we must continue to push forward for a strong, clean energy and climate bill, just like we have done countless times in the past. I am done with blame. History is on our side. Are you?
Take action today for a cleaner, stronger, and more sustainable future. Join NRDC Action Fund on Facebook and Twitter and stay up-to-date on the latest environmental issues and actions you can take to help protect our planet.
Our friends at politickernj.com have put together a list of 2010 NJ Budget Winners & Losers. The list excoriates Cory Booker (Fastest Change from "Too Early to Tell" to "Budget Loser" Award) and the entire NJ Assembly (Worst Use of the Legislative Process), and makes fun of Chris Christie's presidential aspirations. There's plenty more where that came from, some of it infuriating, and some amusing.
But here's the first item, and we couldn't agree more with politickernj:
1. Best Use of the Legislative Process Award:
State Sen. Loretta Weinberg
Last seen sinking with the Viking funeral pyre of Jon Corzine, state Sen. (and former Lieutenant Gov. candidate) Loretta Weinberg (D-Teaneck) rebounded from last year's statewide loss with vigor during the budget session. When Gov. Chris Christie chopped family planning out of the budget, Weinberg proved why she is one of the state's most resourceful and effective lawmakers. Not only did she put the women's caucus to work and mobilize Republican senators Diane Allen and Jennifer Beck in support of a bill that would restore the $7.5 million allocation, she even tapped the hardened hearts of several male Republicans to land the required two/thirds majority to effect an override. A version of Weinberg's bill simultaneously passed in the assembly, shepherded by Assemblywoman Linda Stender (D-Fanwood) but is not veto-proof. Weinberg identified her issue and applied every legislative tool at her disposal to drive it forward.
They will continue their busy to start July in Trenton today. As Day 2 of the special session begins, both the Assembly and Senate Budget Committees will get started. Over in the Senate, it will be an early wake up call at 8am:
The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee will meet Friday to set a schedule for its work on property tax reform. The committee expects to meet through the summer to evaluate various proposals to control property taxes.
And in the Assembly, they will get started a little later at 10am with a hearing on the property tax increase caps. Various state officials have been invited to testify and the committee also will entertain testimony from members of the general public.
In addition, lawmakers will hold a news conference continue to urge Gov. Chris Christie to act on legislation to restore the $7.5 million in cuts for women's health programs. You can hear the audio streamed live of the hearings here and NJN will be carrying it all live. I've embeded their feed:
Yesterday, President Obama met with Senators at the White House and pushed them to pass comprehensive, clean energy and climate legislation. Still, the skeptics are spinning a monotonous web of negativity regarding what is achievable on this front. And, not surprisingly, the "mainstream media" once again has been asleep at the wheel in setting the record straight. Fortunately, we know that when this President rolls up his sleeves, he gets stuff done and delivers on his promises. One thing’s for sure; President Obama is anything but an underachiever!
Along these lines, President Obama held a press conference following the G-20 summit in Toronto. In response to a reporter’s question regarding how he would achieve his deficit reduction goals, the president responded:
For some reason people keep being surprised when I do what I said I was going to do. So, I say I’m going to reform our [health care system], and people say well gosh that’s not smart politics maybe we should hold off. Or I say we’re going to move forward on [Don’t Ask Don’t Tell] and somehow people say well why are you doing that, I’m not sure that’s good politics. I’m doing it because I said I was going to do it, and I think it’s the right thing to do. And people should learn that lesson about me, because next year when I start presenting some very difficult choices to the country I hope some of these folks who are hollering about deficit and debt step up cause I’m calling their bluff.
To that list of accomplishments, we could also add:
Creating or saving 2.2-2.8 million jobs, well on the way to Obama’s February 2009 pledge that he would "create or save 3-and-a-half million jobs over the next two years."
Reforming Wall Street (likely to pass Congress any day now)
Overhauling the student loan market
Reaching a nuclear arms treaty with Russia
We could go on and on, but you get the point: anyone who continues, at this point, to be "surprised" when President Obama gets things done when he puts his mind to it is deep in denial. Or, as a previous president might have put it, they are wildly "misunderestimating" our 44th president.
Clearly, as we’ve seen over the past two years, underachieving is not a problem Barack Obama suffers from. Of course, even a superachiever like Barack Obama has an awful lot on his plate to deal with. And right now, one of the most important things on Obama’s plate is figuring out how to push comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation through the U.S. Senate. Along those lines, yesterday, Obama met with a group of Senators on this issue, reportedly holding firm in his call for putting a price on carbon emissions.
The question at this point is, will President Obama roll up his sleeves and deliver on another of his major campaign promise (as well as a major challenge facing our nation)? Given the long list of accomplishments mentioned above, it certainly wouldn’t be smart to bet against him. The fact is, Barack Obama usually succeeds in whatever he puts his mind to.
Given the nation’s increased focus on energy and climate issues – and the increased support by the American people for taking strong action as a result of the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster – now is clearly the time for boldness and for bluff calling by our nation’s leaders. Today, President Obama has the opportunity to demonstrate once more that, when he rolls up his sleeves, he accomplishes what he says he’s going to do. In sum, today is clearly the moment for President Obama to prove the doubters and naysayers wrong – to call their bluff - yet again!
As is often the case, the "mainstream" media nowadays is pushing a "conventional wisdom" line that has only one major problem – it’s largely or completely wrong. In this case, the "wisdom" is that voting for limits on carbon pollution is bad politics. The polling indicates it’s far more complicated than that.
For instance, the latest CBS/NY Times poll indicates that nearly 90% of Americans believe U.S. energy policy needs either "fundamental changes’ or "to be completely rebuilt," while 97% of Americans are "angry" or "bothered" by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Those percentages hardly appear to indicate a status quo, "conventional wisdom" electorate on this issue, or an automatic political downside to making fundamental changes in U.S. energy policy.
Perhaps that is why, when you actually look at the 17 Democrats up for reelection this year (Bayh, Bennet, Boxer, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan, Feingold, Gillibrand, Inouye, Leahy, Lincoln, Mikulski, Murray, Reid, Schumer, Specter, Wyden) and subtract out those retiring (Bayh, Burris, Dodd, Dorgan) or defeated in a primary (Specter), you find that the vast majority – all except for Blanche Lincoln - are in favor of climate and energy legislation. Let’s take a look.
Michael Bennet- What could be clearer than this recent quote, "The best way to limit carbon pollution is for Congress to pass a comprehensive climate and energy bill." Barbara Boxer- A climate champion by any measure Russ Feingold- Issued a statement declaring, "Climate change is real and we need to address it. By blocking action on climate change, the Murkowski resolution would have stalled our march toward energy independence through more efficient vehicles, alternative fuels and renewable energy, all of which can spur new American jobs." Kirsten Gillibrand - Listed as a definite "yes" on a comprehensive clean energy and climate bill by E&E News Daniel Inouye- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Patrick Leahy- He recently stated, "Let us not be known as the Congress that continued to punt, pass and kick on some of the crucial issues like these, on which the American people are looking for solutions, not procrastination." Barbara Mikulski - Listed as a definite yes on a comprehensive, clean energy and climate bill by E&ENews Patty Murray- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Harry Reid – Has called for "bring[ing] comprehensive clean energy legislation before the full Senate later this summer." Chuck Schumer- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews Ron Wyden- Also listed as a definite yes by E&ENews
And let’s not forget these two letters – one on March 19 to Harry Reid and the other on January 26 to President Obama - showing 33 Senators (not even counting John Kerry and Joe Lieberman, who didn’t sign either letter but obviously are champions on this issue, plus most likely others as) clearly calling for climate legislation.
So, why is it that we keep seeing the perception in the "mainstream media" that a vote for comprehensive clean energy and climate legislation is bad politics? Perhaps because of the unfortunate tendency of the "mainstream media" to keep recycling quotes from a few loud Senators -- like Byron Dorgan and Evan Bayh -- who just happen to be exiting the scene altogether for potentially "greener" (and not in the environmental sense!) pastures. For the "mainstream media," recycling their preferred narrative may make a good story (or the story they want to tell, for whatever reason). In politics, however, perception is nine tenths of reality, and in this case the reality is that there is far too much at stake for this country to rely on "conventional" wisdom, especially when the facts – those troublesome things - tell a very different story.
In this context, this past Friday, Greg Sargent of The Plum Line asked an important question regarding clean energy and climate legislation in the U.S. Senate: "Can A bold new crop of Senators save carbon limits?" Sargent’s intriguing thesis was that[,] "[i]f carbon limits have any prayer of surviving in the Senate's energy reform bill, it may turn on the efforts of one group: The energetic freshman and sophomore Senators that are pushing hard to keep carbon limits alive." Sargent pointed to an interview with one of those freshmen, Jeff Merkley of Oregon, in which he argued that "There's a lot of new energy in those two classes, and they recognize that this is the moment."
In short, what Merkley’s saying is that it’s time for Democrats to stop listening so much to the "old guard" of Senators who are retiring. Instead, Merkley makes the case for paying more attention to the Senate freshman (and sophomores), who by definition were elected relatively recently and, therefore – at least theoretically - might have their fingers closer to the pulse of the public than the old timers. In part, the question is whether there could be a "generational" difference going on here. Not "generational" in the chronological sense, in which "younger" Senators are more pro-environment than "older" Senators. But, perhaps, "generational" in the sense of "political age," as in "how long have they been in Washington, DC?"
Given the analysis above, we might want to add "members in cycle" to Merkley’s admonition about listening more to freshmen then to old timers. Because the fact is, the majority of Democrats actually facing the polls this November are in favor of taking action on energy independence, clean energy, and holding corporate polluters accountable. Perhaps this is because they are listening to what the public is clearly demanding, which is fundamental change in U.S. energy policy? And perhaps they are not listening to a "conventional media" narrative which is completely wrong? Regardless of the reason, it appears at the moment – and certainly on this issue - that Democrats would be better served by listening more to the folks facing public opinion, as well as those elected more recently, and less to the ones preparing to depart for "greener" pastures.
The Senate has committees meeting in Trenton today to vote on legislation, consider nominees and hear testimony.
All eyes will be on the Senate Education committee where Commissioner Bret Schundler will testify and no doubt be questioned about that debacle that is the race for the top application. In addition, legislation to investigate the NJSIAA will be considered.
Senator Lesniak will once again try to get his affordable housing legislation passed out of his Economic Growth committee. Fair Share has written a good deal about the bill here on the blog.
The Environment and Energy Committee will consider bills dealing with bow hunting, clean energy financing, private wells, wind energy, deer management and more.
I'll put the full list of bills up for consideration below the fold. If you can't make it to Trenton, you can follow along live here.
There are no committees meeting today, but both the Senate and Assembly will hold voting sessions with full board lists up for consideration.
Among the bills that will get the most attention include the new surcharge on people making over $1 million per year, reduce the employer unemployment taxes for the upcoming year and the Transparency in Government Act.
I'll put the full list of bills up for consideration below the fold. If you can't make it to Trenton, you can follow along live here.
"Regardless of her qualifications, she's not going to get a hearing," said Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Nicholas Scutari (D-Union), whose committee is responsible for vetting the governor's nominees.
Senator Lesniak offered these comments on the current standoff:
Lesniak says he, Sweeney and Scutari agree that the nomination won't be heard until the appointment comes up in two years, when he says they will judge that nominee on the merits. If the standoff isn't resolved by May 20, Chief Justice Rabner can fill the seat for the duration from the ranks of the Appellate court or retired Justices. For now though, the rhetoric on both sides continues to build.
"The Governor has fulfilled his constitutional duties by making a judicial nomination; the Senate's constitutional duty is to provide 'advise and consent' through a hearing for the nominee, followed by an up-or-down vote in the full Senate. That's all we ask. So, we would be surprised if the Senate President is willing to simply abandon the New Jersey Constitution and refuse to consider a qualified judicial nominee. That would truly be a historic and unfortunate precedent.
"Also, the Constitution clearly states that all justices of the Supreme Court are appointed to an initial seven-year term - not automatic lifetime tenure. The framers of our state Constitution did that for a reason, and we have to believe that the Senate President understands and respects that."
Does anyone find it ironic that after making the unprecedented decision of to not renominate a sitting Justice, that now all of a sudden they are going to worry about setting precedent?
While much attention will likely still be on the replacement of Justice Wallace, the Senate Budget Committee will take their look at proposed FY 2011 budgets for the Department of Law and Public Safety, The Judiciary and the Department of Children and Familes today.
With the Department of Children and Families, the Governor has proposed eliminating the Office of Child Advocate Overall, they are facing a proposed 4% cut. I wonder how long it takes for Justice Wallace to come up in the Judiciary hearing. And the Department of Law and Public Safety budget is facing a 7% cut.
The hearings will be streamed live with audio and NJN will be carrying the hearings as well if you want to watch. Their live coverage is scheduled to begin at 10:00 am. I've embeded their feed:
The Senate Budget and Appropriations committee takes their turn today holding three hearings to examine proposed FY 2011 department budgets.
First up at 9:30am is the Department of Health and Senior Services. Next will be Bob Martin testifying on behalf of the Department of Environmental Protection. There is no doubt plenty to discuss as Martin unveiled plans to reorganize the department and named much of his high ranking staff. The Final hearing of the day will be the Department of Agriculture beginning at 3:30pm.
The Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee will meet today to review the proposed FY2011 budgets for the departments of State, Banking and Insurance (DOBI) and Military and Veterans' Affairs (DMAVA).
Fresh off the release of her Red Tape Review, Lieutenant Gov. Kim Guadagno will present for the Department of State at 9:30 a.m. DOBI Commissioner Tom Considine is scheduled to address the panel at 11:30 a.m. Adjutant General Glenn Reith, head of DMAVA, is scheduled to present at 1:30 p.m.
The hearings will be streamed live with audio and NJN will be carrying the hearing as well if you want to watch. Their live coverage is scheduled to begin at 9:30am. I've embeded their feed:
40 days from today - on May 18 - we will see two HUGE primaries for U.S. Senate. Even though these races aren't in New Jersey, they impact Democrats across the country and, well, the entire country as a whole.
In Pennsylvania, Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak will try to upset Republican-for-decades Arlen Specter.
In Arkansas, Democratic Lieutenant Governor Bill Halter will try to upset corporate lackey Blanche Lincoln.
These two races are tremendously important to defining who and what the Democratic Party is and what we will be fighting for.
If you can volunteer for these candidates (or encourage friends and family in Pennsylvania and Arkansas to do so), that would be amazing.
Of course, if you can help with a contribution to either or both via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page as soon as possible, it will make a big impact.
Polling shows that both Specter and Lincoln are at risk of - if not likely to - hand these Senate seats over to far-right-wing Republicans. (And, even if these two retain the seats, that's not much better on many key issues.)
Congressman Sestak and Lieutenant Governor Halter winning these primaries are critical to keeping these seats in truly Democratic hands. Your support can help make that happen! Please hop over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page right away to make a contribution - an investment in the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party to pull out an old expression - and show your support.
Thanks SO much for any support you can provide. 40 Days.
I see that once again a handful of Republican Senators are holding up extension of unemployment benefits. We all know that this bill will command more than 60 votes, just like last time, once a vote is allowed. Last time the Senate went into recess, Lautenberg and Menendez made statements of outrage, and after the recess Bunning dropped his hold.
I really hope that this time the Democrats don't allow the Senate to go into recess. Don't tell me it's outrageous when you reward your opponents with a vacation. Show how seriously you take this, and keep the Senate working as long as they hold up the bill!
Update (late Thursday night): The bill is still being held up. McJoan of Dailykos says "they've voted to adjourn for the night, 49-39, though not for recess. The adjournment resolution allows them stay in session through Wednesday if needed." There are reports that Reid and McConnell reached a deal to extend benefits for a week, but the House rejected it.
Second Update (Friday morning): Of course, no deal was reached and the Senate will adjourn anyway. Pathetic. The link has a good discussion of the procedures to overcome the hold.
While there is no action before the legislature and committees in Trenton today, but that hasn't stopped the Senate Budget Committee from taking the show on the road.
They will hold a Public Hearing on the FY2011 State Budget at the Rutgers Camden Law School at 9am. This is the second public hearing they are holding. The first was in Bergen County this past Tuesday at Bergen County Community College and Paramus. You can see the Governor's proposed budget in brief here.
With 27 states having borrowed about $30 billion from the feds to pay their unemployment claims, it is "just not possible" to cover all of the costs "in this budget climate," Menendez said following a meeting of New Jersey's congressional delegation with Gov. Chris Christie today. Menendez said he would work to delay New Jersey's interest payments, or perhaps forgive them entirely, to provide some degree of federal help.
It's too bad Christie contributed to this climate with his attacks on the stimulus, but after all, it worked out for him.
Meanwhile, Senators Lautenberg and Menendez are outraged that Republican SenatorJim Bunning continues to block unemployement insurance.
"At the stroke of midnight, more than one million jobless Americans lost critical benefits they rely on to help pay for housing, feed their families and afford health care," said Sen. Lautenberg. "Blocking unemployment insurance and COBRA benefits is proof positive that Republicans care more about scoring political points than helping working families survive these tough economic times. Families are struggling every day to make ends meet, and I will work to end this Republican filibuster as soon as possible."
I agree with 100% with Lautenberg, but as we asked before, what's he going to doabout it? If this is so critical, why was it left for the last weekend? Why did the Senate go into recess instead of working through the cloture delay all weekend? When will Democrats pledge to reform the rules against these endless filibuster delays, and why not threaten the Republican-created idea of the nuclear constitutional option? Why isn't the President on network TV denouncing this? (Okay, network TV is talking about Bunning.)
In the "surprising side effects category," it turns out that Bunning has also stopped the "Medicare fix" meaning that doctors get an immediate 21% reduction in their fees for seeing Medicare patients. These are the cuts that Republicans like Frank LoBiondo made law but now posture against. In addition, thousands of people have been thrown out of work by Bunning. It's pathetic, and while Republicans are responsible, Democrats are their enablers.
The clock is ticking on the lame duck legislative session. Both the Assembly and Senate have committee meetings today. The Senate has the Judiciary, Health, Budget and State Government Committees meeting. They will consider 26 bills and 23 nominations.
The Assembly has the Appropriations, Education, Environmental, Financial Institutions, Housing, Human Services, Judiciary, Labor, Regulated Professions, State Government and Transportation committees meeting. They will consider a total of 98 bills.
The Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens committee will hear testimony from Congressman Frank Pallone, Jr. and invited guests on federal health care reform, and its implications for New Jersey.
The Assembly Education Committee will conduct a discussion with invited participants on charter schools, urban education, and strategies to address the needs of low-income students.
Here are stories about some of the Legislation that is pending before the Committees in Trenton. I'll put the full list of bills up for consideration in the committees below the fold. With everything that is on the agenda, an omission is the Marriage Equality legislation that has been sent back over to the Senate. Garden State Equality will still be holding their Lobby Day in Trenton hoping for a vote to come.
It's another day of lame duck with action in Trenton focusing on Senate Committees. The Assembly has a quorom scheduled for 1pm as well and Michael Symons explains at Capitol Quickies:
No committee meetings or floor votes are planned. But the quorum call will allow for new bills to be added to the Legislature's potential plate when it comes back to town in January. When the Assembly left after this past Monday's voting session, the plan was to not reconvene until Jan. 4th.
We'll have to see what they may add to the agenda for the new year. Over on the Senate side, four committees will meet.
The Senate Budget and Appropriations committee has just four bills listed including small wind energy legislation and dam restoration projects. The Commerce committee has the largest agenda with twenty five bills getting their day in Trenton. Some of those include medical malpractice liability insurance concerns, Tree care licenses and one that permits a three year payoff of accumulated deficits of municipal health insurance funds.
The Environment and Economic Growth Committee each have five bills up for consideration. Highlights include permitting for energy facilities, a fix to the site remediation act and renewable energy legislation.
The lame duck legislative session will get under way today in Trenton. Not only will they have committee meetings, but new Senators will take office including Jim Beach and Michael Doherty who won special elections. There will be leadership elections held in the caucus meetings with it likely that Steve Sweeney and Sheila Oliver will be the next leaders in their respective houses. There will also be supporters and opponents of marriage equality demonstrating for a lobby day today.
Six Senate committees meet. Included on the agendas are bills that let judges waive the mandatory minimums now required for drug-free school zone violations; expand prevailing wage rules to cafeteria contracts; require chain restaurants to put nutrition information on their menus; and boost penalties for repeatedly driving drunk or with a suspended license.
Seven Assembly committees meet. The bills on the docket include proposals to require more state revenue from casino taxes on seniors' transportation; extend prevailing wage rules to cafeteria contracts; prohibit smoking e-cigarettes in indoor workplaces and public places; and create a registry for adults with autism.
The two most talked about bills, marriage equality and medical marijuana are not scheduled for any action today. The Senate Labor committee will hear testimony from the Commissioner of Labor and Workforce Development about the impact of the current recession on New Jersey workers and businesses and the effectiveness of State, federal and local programs to assist workers and their families (including unemployment insurance, job training and job placement programs). I'll put the full agenda and schedule below the fold.
Most of the attention has been on the battle for power between Steve Sweeney and Dick Codey, but with a new Senate President comes many new committee chairs and PolitickerNJ had some information yesterday:
State Sen. Nicholas Scutari (D-Linden) will become the new chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a position that will take on increased clout for a Democratic-controlled Senate confirming appointments made by a Republican governor. Scutari was no pushover for Gov. Jon Corzine's appointees - he takes his advise and consent responsibilities seriously, and does not view Judiciary as a rubber stamp. That's something Gov.-elect Christopher Christie's front office will need to take into consideration And Scutari is intellectually superior to the current chairman, State Sen. Paul Sarlo (D-Wood-Ridge).
Sarlo is expected to become Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee when State Sen. Barbara Buono (D-Metuchen) becomes Majority Leader.
And in the Senate, it looks like Teresa Ruiz (D-Newark), a protégé of Newark political leader Stephen Adubato, might replace Shirley Turner (D-Lawrence) as chairman of the Education Committee. A fair assumption is that Ruiz will share Adubato's fervent support for charter schools.
Turner could wind up a casualty of the contest for Senate President; she backed incumbent Richard Codey (D-Roseland), while Ruiz supported the likely winner, Stephen Sweeney (D-West Deptford).
We'll have to see who is left without a seat when the music stops. And we still get to play more games before the music stops on the Assembly side. The leadership vote is scheduled for November 23.
