New Jersey Family Policy Council

"Cut Costs–Keep Me In Office Longer!"
Posted February 6, 2009

Tax increases, government downsizing, toll hikes - in the Garden State, we've seen all these and more as legislators attempt to cure the financial ills that have plagued our state for nearly all of recent memory. But keeping elected officials in office longer as a "cost-cutting" measure? Now, that's a new one.

Yet, that's exactly what Senator Nicholas Scutari (D-Union) recommends in Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) 126, which proposes amending the State Constitution to lengthen the terms of members of the Senate and General Assembly. According to the proposed amendment, Assembly terms would lengthen from two years to an alternating pattern of a three-year term followed by a two-year term, and Senate terms would extend to five years, changing the current pattern of two four-year terms broken up by a two-year term at the beginning of each decade. As it involves amending the state constitution, if approved by the legislature, the measure would still have to go to the people for final passage.

According to Scutari, the bill's aim is cost-cutting. "For me," he stated, "essentially, it's a way to save money." In theory, the intended savings would materialize as the state would not have to hold statewide elections each year.

But as the Star Ledger Editorial Board notes, "[S]ince there would still be elections for various local offices in the off-years, any savings is likely to be minimal."

The Ledger editors further write:

The down side, of course, is that voters would have fewer opportunities to "throw the bums out." In fact, there would only be two years per decade when both the Assembly and Senate were up for election together. There would be three-year stretches without any state-level election, and some years the governor's office would be up for election when no legislators were on the ballot.

Aside from these factors - and perhaps of even greater concern - is the fact that Scutari's proposal appears to be yet another attempt to address the state's financial woes while avoiding the one solution that would actually make a positive and lasting fiscal impact: real and significant spending cuts.

The Ledger describes Scutari's proposal as "a fix in search of a problem." Perhaps a more accurate description would be that offered by blogger and New Jersey City University Political Science Professor Thurman Hart, who aptly labeled the bill "Scutari's Incumbent Protection Plan."

Scutari's bill is currently in the Senate State Government Committee - which took it up Monday only to put it back down again, opting to delay indefinitely a vote on the measure.

In reality, however, the Committee should have immediately rejected the bill in a resounding and unanimous vote. Indeed, extending the terms of elected officials - particularly considering that many of those same elected officials are responsible for the perpetuation of the budgetary mess we now face - is hardly a solution.