My mother always told me to “Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it.” Too bad Doug Forrester’s mother didn’t give him the same advice.

For weeks, Forrester doggedly attacked Bob Torricelli. His campaign had one theme. He was the “un-Torricelli.” Through it all, Torricelli became increasingly plagued by ethical problems, unable to divert attention to the issues of the campaign and he fell badly behind in the polls. Forrester managed to accomplish what no Democrat ever thought we would live to see—Bob Torricelli giving up his Senate seat.

Congratulations Mr. Forrester. You won. You got your wish. So, now did you expect a coronation? A free pass to the United States Senate? Did you expect to run against no Democratic opponent, or one who has declared he no longer seeks the office? Then, if Torricelli still wins, party leaders would replace him with a candidate who no one had an opportunity to vote for? Does that make any sense? It just doesn’t work that way in America. Mr. Forrester—it’s time to get over it and move on.

Wisely, the New Jersey Supreme Court didn’t see it that way either. In a victory for the voters of our state, the Court declared that the public interest and the preservation of our two-party system requires that voters get two clear choices on Election Day. In Senator Frank Lautenberg, they will have that choice.

The Forrester campaign reacted liked crybabies. “This is judicial activism,” they howled. “An unconstitutional interpretation of a clear statute,” they declared. Nonsense. It was an obvious interpretation of the general legislative intent and the spirit of our election laws that we get a real choice on Election Day. That is the role of a Court. To interpret statutes; not to simply read the words without consideration for their purpose. There was nothing special about the 51 day limit. It was merely for the convenience of county clerks in ballot preparation. Those needs can be met with a new name on the ballot.

The people of New Jersey deserve a full and fair ballot choice. After all, should all New Jersey voters be punished for the actions of Bob Torricelli?

To my Republican friends who criticize this “activist” Court, I remind you that the score on Wednesday was 7-0. Not one dissenting vote. True, there are more Democrats than Republicans on the Court. But not even Justice Peter Verniero, a staunch Republican partisan before his appointment to the Court, expressed a dissenting opinion. That must be because they all agreed it was the right thing for New Jersey. And it is.

Now, Forrester has asked the United States Supreme Court, those wonderful folks who interposed their own decision in place of that of Florida voters in 2000, and who gave us the highly questionable opinion in Bush vs. Gore, to step in and do for New Jersey what they did for Florida. No thank you!

It’s funny how Republicans, the ones who usually criticize the intrusion of the Federal Government in our lives, go running to Federal Court when it suits their needs. Democrats, who usually favor government intervention, are arguing that the State should be the final arbiter of its own statutes.

Despite Republican protestations, this is not like what happened in Florida. First, there is really no federal issue for the Court to use to acquire jurisdiction. Second, there are no voters who will be disenfranchised, because the election has not been held yet. In fact, no one will be harmed, as the Court has created a process whereby the approximately 1,500 absentee ballots that have already gone out can be replaced and new ballots printed for everyone else. The cost of that reprinting will be borne, and fairly so, by the Democratic Party. There is more than enough time to make the necessary physical and logistical changes to permit the Lautenberg substitution.

If Doug Forrester continues his sour grapes complaining, it will only backfire on him. People are ready to move on and it is finally the season for us to actually begin to pay attention to this race. If Forrester has a problem, it can be defined in just two words: “Doug Forrester.” His sole purpose in running was to retire Bob Torricelli. So, maybe he should declare victory and step aside for another Republican who actually stands for something. Instead, one month away from Election Day, he has done nothing to define himself or what he stands for. Look at his web site for example. Try if you can, to determine his position on the important issues that face New Jersey. You can’t, because he has purposely avoided taking stands which will might turn any voters against him.

So, what do we know about him? He has little experience in public life. And, while Congress failed to pass prescription drug benefits for seniors, Doug Forrester has made his money as a middleman, driving up the prices our parents and seniors pay for prescription drugs. Kind of says a lot, doesn’t it? Even more frightening, he supposedly supports the agenda of Republican Senate Leader Trent Lott. In a nutshell, out of step and out of touch with the interests of the voters of New Jersey.

Contrast Forrester with Frank Lautenberg, if there even is a comparison. A proven fighter for New Jersey’s interests. Not a flashy guy, but certainly a quietly effective one. Someone who cares about safeguarding social security, making prescription drugs affordable, protecting the environment and a woman’s right to choose, and in favor of common sense gun control in the most densely populated state in the country. The person responsible for banning smoking on airlines.

Frank Lautenberg has showed us what he stands for. If the Republicans want a real Senate race, it’s time for them to step up and do the same, or they do not even deserve your consideration.

October 6, 2002