Instead of getting to the truth of the Bridgegate affair, the new Legislative Select Committee on Investigation is looking more likely to obscure or distort the facts.
I voted in favor of forming the committee, and agreed to serve on it. Like all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, I recognize the importance of learning who was motivated by what to authorize the infamous lane closures that wreaked havoc with people’s lives last fall. To protect the integrity of government as well as the safety of the traveling public, that truth must come out.
But the Democratic majority structured the committee in ways guaranteed to cast doubt on its findings. Moreover, it has no mechanism for public input, no ceiling on costs and no limits on its scope or methods.
For starters: With eight Democrats and four Republicans, the group’s extreme partisan imbalance undercuts any sense of shared purpose. Such a brazenly stacked deck sets the stage for unproductive bickering instead of thoughtful debate. The lack of a truly deliberative process is sure to cast doubt on any findings that seem to serve the interests of a political party over those of the public.
Adding to the partisan air, the committee’s co-chair, Assemblyman John Wisniewski, was the head of New Jersey’s Democratic Party from 2010-2013. The other co-chair, state Sen. Loretta Weinberg, was the Democratic lieutenant-governor nominee in 2009, losing to the Chris Christie ticket.
And the chairmen in many senses are the committee, with unchecked power to direct the investigation.
Wisniewski selected and hired special counsel before the committee was even formed — and we members must get the chairman’s approval to even ask a question of the counsel. Wisniewski and Weinberg alone decide when the committee meets and how it conducts business. They’re under no obligation to share any documents with other members, except as they see fit.
In an executive (closed) session after the first meeting of the Assembly Select Committtee (now merged into the Legislative Select Committee), we received a list of 20 subpoenas that had already been issued in our names. When one of my colleagues introduced amendments that addressed such flaws, Wisniewski moved to table the amendments without even bothering to read them. He cut off discussion of every minority concern with a brief statement amounting to Trust me — while chipping away at our trust with every unilateral decision.
With all due respect to our co-chairs, no one or two people’s version of the truth can constitute a full and fair accounting. Think of it this way: Shining a single flashlight into a dark room may illuminate the walls while missing the closets.
For example, one truth about Bridgegate is already well known: The Port Authority, operator of the George Washington Bridge, has long been hopelessly dysfunctional. Part of the quasi-public netherworld often dubbed “shadow government,” this $3.5 billion behemoth lacks meaningful fiscal, managerial or ethical oversight. Many legislators, including me, have vigorously pushed bipartisan reform proposals for years, without success. Couldn’t the committee, while investigating Bridgegate, craft legislation to thwart similar malfeasance in the future? Such a bill would almost certainly sail through the Legislature. But thus far, there has been nary a mention of this opportunity.
I have no reason to doubt the skills of the outside legal team brought in from Illinois on the strength of their success in prosecuting disgraced former Gov. Rod Blagojevich. But is it wise to put no cap on their hours or expenses? These costs will be borne by New Jersey taxpayers, already burdened by some of the nation’s highest taxes.
There are ways to minimize the hit. Why not invite pro bono support from retired state Supreme Court justices, former attorneys general or faculty from our law schools? Given the high-profile and significance of the committee’s work, I’m sure we’d have multiple volunteers. The involvement of unbiased, unpaid representatives of the public would offer an extra layer of oversight. And the investigation could only benefit from the input of experts with no political or financial skin in the game.
In addition to blank checks for its lawyers, the committee has been granted what amounts to immortality. Regardless of what it finds or fails to find, it is empowered to continue investigating virtually anyone for virtually anything, as long as the majority chooses.
The seriousness of Bridgegate may indeed warrant a lengthy investigation. But it is one thing to get at the truth behind this abhorrent sequence of events, and quite another to create a semi-permanent taxpayer-funded Coliseum which exists largely to throw as many people as possible to the lions. New Jerseyans are patient, but not naïve. That truth, at least, is incontrovertible.
Amy Handlin is the deputy minority leader of the NJ General Assembly.