Assemblyman Lou Greenwald wants to increase the number of signatures required on petitions for candidates to get a place on the ballot in New Jersey.
As New Jersey’s political landscape continues to evolve, residents are watching with concern as lawmakers are quietly rigging the system in favor of the corporate-allied political establishment.
Under Governor Phil Murphy’s leadership, alongside influential lawmakers in the state legislature, a series of actions have been enacted that make it harder for citizens to command control over their government rather than taking steps to improve democracy.
From increasing the hurdles to ballot access to introducing new campaign finance rules and curtailing the right to public information, New Jersey’s recent changes raise the troubling question: Is the state’s electoral system being intentionally tilted to benefit the elite?
One of the most democratic changes and devastating impact on New Jersey’s political establishment was ending the practice of rigging primary election ballots, which was accomplished in federal court.
For years, political power brokers were allowed to place favorable candidates in favorable positions on the primary ballot, ensuring that incumbents and other corporate cronies maintained their grip on power.
This was often done by exploiting election laws that allowing party elites to stack the deck in their favor while ordinary citizens were left to struggle against the odds in a tightly controlled field.
Murphy’s administration responded to the court orders ending the practice that many saw as a blatant attempt to subvert the democratic process with moves to shut out reform candidates and the public at large.
Despite the legal victory, the system remains skewed, with entrenched party leaders continuing to exercise undue influence over the candidate selection process.
“While this may look like progress, the reality is that many barriers to true political competition still exist,” says Lisa McCormick, a former candidate for US senator and critic of Murphy’s policies. “The ballot may be cleaner, but the game is still rigged in favor of corporate donors and party insiders.”
The United States is experiencing two major forms of democratic erosion in its governing institutions, election manipulation and unbridled spending.
Perhaps the most glaring assault on democracy in recent legislative changes is the increase in the number of signatures required for candidates to gain ballot access.
The new laws demand that candidates from third parties or independent movements collect significantly more signatures than before, effectively making it nearly impossible for outsiders to compete in the electoral process.
“This is just another way for the corporate-backed establishment to maintain control,” says political strategist James Devine. “By making it so difficult for new voices to appear on the ballot, they are shutting down the possibility of genuine competition. The system is designed to make sure that only the well-funded and politically connected can afford to run for office.”
These changes disproportionately hurt candidates who are not backed by the political machinery, particularly progressive groups or those advocating for reforms that would limit the power of corporate money in politics.
Another method the political elite uses to protect their dominance is through campaign finance laws that, while ostensibly designed to curb corruption, often serve to reinforce it.
Recent tweaks to New Jersey’s campaign finance laws have introduced loopholes that allow for more secretive “dark money” expenditures, funneled through third-party entities that do not have to disclose their donors.
Through this system, corporate interests, labor unions, and other powerful lobby groups can pour unlimited amounts of money into races without accountability.
This coordination between dark money groups and political candidates remains largely hidden from public view, rendering the state’s elections vulnerable to outside influence.
“The very idea of fair elections is under threat when corporations can flood the system with unchecked cash,” says McCormick. “It’s impossible to tell who’s truly calling the shots in this state when the money flows from so many anonymous sources.”
The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which allowed for unlimited independent political spending, has made this problem more pronounced. In New Jersey, dark money groups play a crucial role in financing campaigns, particularly during primary elections when corporate donors can effectively decide who will emerge as the party’s candidate.
Perhaps Murphy’s most insidious measures have included laws restricting access to public information, severely curbing the public’s ability to hold politicians accountable.
Virtually none of the Democratic legislators stood up to the political establishment’s manipulations designed to thwart democracy.
Efforts to increase transparency have been rolled back under the guise of efficiency, as the administration enacted policies that restrict the release of public records and limit open government initiatives by freeing government officials from accountability for unlawful secrecy.
In New Jersey, some public officials have argued that releasing public documents and awarding legal fees for victims of bad actors might cost too much but the state’s advantage is the public’s loss.
Critics point out that these justifications are merely an excuse to conceal corruption or avoid public scrutiny.
“We’re seeing a steady erosion of the public’s right to know,” says a journalist and advocate for government transparency. “What’s at stake here is the ability of ordinary citizens to understand how decisions are made, especially when those decisions are being influenced by powerful interests.”
Beyond these recent legislative moves, New Jersey’s political establishment has long relied on other forms of manipulation to keep power in the hands of a few.
Gerrymandering, for example, remains a powerful tool for shaping electoral outcomes. By redrawing district lines to favor certain parties, politicians can ensure that their seats are essentially “safe,” minimizing the chance of losing control.
Greenwald authored the constitutional amendment that codified legislative apportionment practices, but it failed to eliminate gerrymandering.
“The party that controls the redistricting process controls the state’s political future,” says one political scientist. “This is why the fight for independent redistricting commissions has been so crucial. But as long as the parties are allowed to draw the lines, gerrymandering will continue to give them an unfair advantage.”
In addition to gerrymandering and dark money, there are also troubling connections between corporations and lawmakers in New Jersey.
Corporations often use their financial muscle to back candidates who will push their agendas, from tax cuts to environmental deregulation, at the expense of the state’s residents.
These corporate alliances have ensured that major industries, from pharmaceuticals to energy, remain well-represented in Trenton, while ordinary citizens’ voices are drowned out.
As New Jersey’s political machine grinds on, it’s becoming clear that the state is being rigged to serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful.
From increasing barriers to entry for candidates to restricting access to vital public information, the system is stacked against those who seek genuine democratic change.
“We cannot allow our democracy to be undermined by those who would rather maintain control than allow the people to have a say,” says Shoemaker. “If we are serious about changing the political landscape in New Jersey, we need to push back against these reforms and fight for a government that works for the people, not for the powerful.”
As the 2024 election season approaches, citizens must remain vigilant and demand reforms that restore true democracy to the Garden State.
If New Jersey’s political leaders can’t beat the will of the people, it’s clear that they’ll do everything in their power to cheat them.