Christie 2012? Forget About It

Written by Mason Herron on Monday November 29, 2010

NJ Gov. Chris Christie's supporters have launched a "Draft Christie" movement for 2012. But despite the enthusiasm, Christie should sit this race out.

It’s clear that the conservative fascination with New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has been rising over the past few months. But despite the enthusiasm for a 2012 presidential bid, Christie should sit this race out.

It’s easy to understand Christie’s popularity with the conservative grassroots. He’s battled the teachers’ union, cut a reported $13 billion in government spending in his first eight weeks in office, vetoed a “millionaire’s tax,” and capped annual property increases at 2.5% in a state with a $10.7 billion projected deficit that is, relative to the size of the budget, the highest in the country. His most recently publicized gesture was to cancel a tunnel between New York and New Jersey, which had a projected cost of $8.7 billion—an episode that reveals, if anything, the alarming complacency we have with deficit spending, as proponents of the plan found the excuse that “we don’t have the money,” entirely insufficient. These policies, along with his confrontational and candid behavior, have allowed him to commandeer more of the media spotlight than would typically be granted to a governor still in his first year in office.

All of this has provoked talk of a potential presidential run, as many conservatives believe that Christie fills the “anti-Obama” role that many believe could be the key to a Republican victory in 2012. An overweight white guy from New Jersey vs. a skinny African-American from Hawaii? Try to imagine a bolder contrast.

Christie has indeed displayed an ability to be an effective Republican chief executive in a typically liberal state. A recent Zogby poll showed him as the leading contender for the nomination amongst Republican voters. A “Draft Christie” movement recently launched. Most importantly, however, is that his approval rating in the state is still above 50%, despite the funding cuts listed above. Considering all this, it’s tempting to imagine Christie taking the oath of office on January 20, 2013.

With that said, however, it’s too soon. He has been in office for less than one year, which would make him—at the time he would presumptively declare his candidacy in 2011—the least experienced candidate in high office among a list of potential contenders that includes Mike Huckabee (10 years as governor), Tim Pawlenty (8 years), Haley Barbour (7 years), Mitch Daniels (6 years), John Thune (6 years as senator), Mitt Romney (4 years as governor), Newt Gingrich (4 years as Speaker), and even Sarah Palin (a little over 2 years as governor).

Considering that Republicans made such a large issue of Obama’s lack of experience, this could pose problems for a potential Christie run. Furthermore, history isn’t exactly on his side, as Christie would be the only governor to abandon the governorship during his first term to ascend to higher office since Theodore Roosevelt (who acceded to the vice presidency). Since the formal primary process began in 1972, Jerry Brown is the only governor to run for president while still in his first term (he ran in 1976).

Christie’s biggest problem would be translating his success at a state level onto the national stage. The budgetary problems most states face these days are rooted in public pensions, or, as in the case of New Jersey, generous compensation to specific constituencies—New Jersey ranks fourth in the percentage (66) of unionized public employees—such as teachers’ unions and other state employees. For this reason, it’s a bit easier for governors to trim budgets early on, as singling out particular groups—sometimes justifiably, sometimes not—as a cause of the state’s financial problems is politically palatable.

Unfortunately, lone constituencies aren’t the cause of the budget problems that the country faces; they’re caused by universal entitlements. Although the main beneficiaries of Social Security and Medicare are typically seniors, they are entitlements we all pay for and expect to receive when the time comes. That is why cutting them will prove difficult, and while Christie has been successful railing against groups in New Jersey that are typically enemies of Republicans, it might prove much harder to tell the entire country that it’s time for tough love. Although he did make cuts to government departments, the three major programs that Christie decided not to freeze or reduce spending for were funding for hospitals, children’s health care, and—wait for it—senior citizen access to prescription drugs. Even Chris “The Wrecking Ball” Christie has been reluctant to trim universal benefits for seniors.

The other problem for Christie is that he would be facing multiple governors who already have significant executive experience. Huckabee, Daniels, Barbour, and Romney all come to mind, and it’s difficult to point out what Christie has done that Daniels has not—other than provoke unions—an issue that would unify and energize the most effective part of the Democratic base come general election time. Daniels, meanwhile, who now has a supermajority in the Indiana state legislature, boasts a 75% approval rating and might be an even more effective governor over the next two years as a result.

The good news for Christie—if he does have presidential ambitions—is that he has more than enough time to turn New Jersey around, close the budget gap over the next few years, and build up an impressive resume to run on. He’ll need to find some more creative ways of closing the deficit that extend beyond targeting unpopular funding, and he’ll probably have to raise taxes eventually—another potential case study for gauging an electorate’s response. Should his current record continue, he‘d be in prime position to make a successful run in the future.

Christie has unequivocally stated that he will not run in 2012. Although he did spend this recent election season campaigning for other candidates, he has not taken the steps necessary for potential presidential contenders, so it appears we can take Christie at his word. As for the possibility of a potential vice presidential bid, I wouldn’t bet on it. Although potential candidates often declare that their priority is their home state without meaning it, I take Christie at his word; he’s well aware of the monumental obstacles that his state still has to overcome, and he seems determined to finish what he started.

The 2016 election, meanwhile, is only a few short years away.

Categories: FF Spotlight News