iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

John Celock
GET UPDATES FROM John:

New Jersey Ethics Rule Proposal Would Suspend Indicted Officials Without Pay

Posted: 04/ 6/2012 1:54 pm Updated: 04/ 6/2012 2:13 pm

New Jersey Ethics
N.J. Gov. Chris Christie launched the largest single-day corruption sweep in New Jersey history in 2009 in his previous post as U.S. attorney.

A pair of Republican lawmakers in New Jersey have proposed a new layer of ethics reform in an attempt to crack down on corruption in the historically ethically plagued state.

Assemblywomen Nancy Munoz (R-Summit) and Amy Handlin (R-Middletown) have proposed legislation that would require all local officials indicted on government corruption offenses to be suspended from office without pay. Munoz said the idea for the proposal came from the arrest of 45 people statewide -- including state and municipal officials -- in a corruption sweep in 2009.

"When you are an elected official, you should be held to a higher standard," Munoz told HuffPost.

The proposal comes weeks after a study led by the Center for Public Integrity in Washington gave New Jersey the highest grade among the 50 states for systems to prevent government corruption. The State Integrity Index showed that a variety of mechanisms that state officials have recently put into place, including open public records laws and a pay-to-play ban, would help to cut down on corruption cases in the state.

Many of the entities that contributed to New Jersey's top ranking have been established in the wake of previous ethics scandals that rocked the state.

"Keep in mind, we're not measuring cases of corruption, but the systems in place to prevent it and encourage openness and transparency in government," CPI managing editor Gordon Witkin said when the report came out.

Munoz said the latest proposal would contribute to beefing up the current systems. Under the measure, any local official arrested and indicted for corruption -- or any of a number of other felony charges -- would automatically be suspended from office without pay. In the event the charges are dropped or the official is acquitted, the suspension would be lifted and backpay restored. While the proposal at present does not apply to officials at the state level, Munoz said an amendment to include them is likely to be included.

The 2009 case was the largest single-day corruption arrest in New Jersey history, bringing down elected and appointed officials in a pay-to-play scandal connected to an organ-selling deal. The investigation was launched by Gov. Chris Christie in his prior post as U.S. attorney.

"The sheer stupidity of these people is mind-boggling," former Westfield Mayor Tom Jardim (D) told Patch at the time.

None of the officials arrested in the 2009 case were suspended, despite public protests calling on many to resign, including then-Hoboken Mayor Peter Cammarano III (D), who saw crowds in front of his house and City Hall less than a month after he took office. Cammarano resigned at the end of his first month in office and later pled guilty to accepting bribes to fund his 2009 mayoral campaign.

Jersey City Councilman Steve Fulop (D), having led calls to suspend several of his city's officials when they were arrested in 2009, said he supports Munoz's bill. Fulop has made ethics his signature issue and believes the bill would address the concerns raised by the 2009 arrests.

"Being arrested by the U.S. attorney for taking bribes -- there is reason for concern," Fulop said. "If something touches on your office, you should take a leave."

Munoz said she hopes that Democrats who control the Assembly will schedule a hearing on the bill. She said she has heard some resistance to the measure. A similar measure is being pushed in the state Senate by Senate Minority Leader Tom Kean Jr. (R-Westfield), who has made ethics a top issue in his decade in the legislature.

"I am always supportive of a bill that make sense," Munoz said. "I hope this will be heard."

Also on HuffPost:

FOLLOW POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
A pair of Republican lawmakers in New Jersey have proposed a new layer of ethics reform in an attempt to crack down on corruption in the historically ethically plagued state. Assemblywomen Nancy M...
A pair of Republican lawmakers in New Jersey have proposed a new layer of ethics reform in an attempt to crack down on corruption in the historically ethically plagued state. Assemblywomen Nancy M...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,280
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (30 total)
10:17 AM on 06/11/2013
I applaud the work of these two ladies but they must look into the office of the NJ Atty General. I have proof that the former NJAG was using fake and forged documents to win in a case of fraud that was filed in USD Court. Here is a small video on just how they created the fake documents. http://youtu.be/0Xhq1S_j20A
How is NJ going to fight crime when the judicial system in NJ is doing the best that it can to cover it up. See; Robinson v. State of NJ, 3;11-cv-06139 US District Court Trenton. I caught a corrupt dental firm in Houston and they bribed a court employee to create a fake restraining order against me to discredit my testimony and now when I point this out to the NJAG they work real hard to cover it up. It got so bad that when the Superior court found out that I had to go in front of the judge that they claimed signed the fake restraining they intentionally hide the case. Howard v. Robinson, FV-11-459-91. I still cannot find the case in the NJ Superior court system.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:31 AM on 04/28/2012
Could we just suspend anyone from New Jersey that gets the idea of having a reality TV show?
12:30 PM on 04/12/2012
Gov Chris Christie should explain why he is continuing to allow such high tax credits to greed and already wealthy corporations such as Prudential Insurance company who are ripping off NJ taxpayers for $250 million?
http://www.occupyessex.com/2012/04/10/why-would-chris-christie-pay-2-5-million-each-for-100-new-jobs/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:22 PM on 04/09/2012
Higher Standard than their Constitutional Rights? Only Republicans can claim to cherish the constitution and attempt to pass law after law that goes counter to it.
03:50 PM on 04/09/2012
Probably should wait until proven guilty, but at that point pensions and health benefits should all be taken away.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chadizzy
04:43 PM on 04/09/2012
So you want to pay someone for working while they are suspended and idicted for felonies. Hmmmm wow and you wonder why we are broke.
06:11 PM on 04/09/2012
Being accused shouldn't be a cause for dismissal. Haivng faster courst would hlep.
IWantTofu
Evolution. Now a political position.
03:14 PM on 04/09/2012
As a Democrat from New Jersey, I say this is a great idea.
Political Piggy
Free comments and ideas are worth every penny paid
03:11 PM on 04/09/2012
Suspended for being indicted - perhaps, perhaps not. It is immportant to consider that indictments do not mean guilt and that corruption charges are often leveled as a political weapon even when there is no merit. WIthout pay, however? No. Even someone holding a public office is innocent until proven guilty.
02:48 PM on 04/09/2012
Just because a person is accused of corruption doesn't make the person guilty. If the states suspends these officials the pay should be pending the outcome of a trial. If no trial or a dismissal then the accused should get paid.

The accused should be suspended because the accused needs to concentrate on the defense of the charges.
02:01 PM on 04/09/2012
The corrupt expect a paycheck - so democrats will never vote for this.
photo
MaxHeadroom
My Karma ran over my dogma.
02:04 PM on 04/09/2012
Like you really know New Jersey politics.

Stick to drooling over Snookie on TV as it better suits you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
folkie51
international micro-mini-relations
02:05 PM on 04/09/2012
Sounds like Democrats proposed it. This should be a completely non-partisan issue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shankapotomus
01:40 PM on 04/09/2012
They better hope they have control because the dems will never go for it.
photo
MaxHeadroom
My Karma ran over my dogma.
02:06 PM on 04/09/2012
Are you and the next "poster boy" (runtexas) joined at the hip or something?
CJ1
Love the Ignorant, hate the Ignorance
03:18 PM on 04/09/2012
Dems proposed it, mo.ron.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Mdw01
Proud as hell to be in the 47 percent!
01:25 PM on 04/09/2012
Christy would be signing his gotojail card
01:09 PM on 04/09/2012
Can't get more conservative than guilty until proven innocent!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
chriss0114
the meanderings of a madman
12:53 PM on 04/09/2012
I'm all infavor of losing benefits when corruption is proved but an indictment is not proof

as they say, a DA can get a ham sandwich indicted

--in any case, legally because they are NOT guilty until proven in a court of law, they ARE entitled to current benefits
12:31 PM on 04/09/2012
any bill that is proposed by R's and gets bi-partisan support cant be that bad, but im sure some of the extremists on the left wll have a problem with this. if you are close enough to the corruption where you need to be suspended then you dont get paid while you are on suspension, 100% logical. If you are found to be innocent they will give you back pay.
03:37 PM on 04/09/2012
How can 'innocent until proven guilty" be extremist?

Do you really have a problem with the Bill of Rights?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VPerry24
Carpe Diem!
12:08 PM on 04/09/2012
Christie, donate your monthly check to a good cause and take down your rose colored glasses and then speak.