Dear Editor:
For the past four years, President Obama has repeatedly shrugged off ridiculous attacks, saying, "Politics is a contact sport."
It is certainly true. Still, I have always believed that whatever candidates and their campaigns might say, the media are there to act as referees: to fact check, to seek confirming sources, to bring balance.
For several weeks, the Hudson Reporter and I have been going back and forth with regard to what I see as deeply biased reporting.
Often, the reporter covering Jersey City produces articles about our campaign that are just not true. Her sources are almost always anonymous.
Last week, this reporter wrote an article about fundraising, suggesting that our campaign violates the same strict pay-to-play laws I introduced as a Councilperson. The article was written with zero facts and zero named sources--but in the end, sadly, the Healy campaign gets what it wants, which is a headline to use in campaign literature.
Here are the facts:
Fact No.1- The law firm referenced in the article, Scarinsci Hollenbeck have neither raised nor bundled funds for my campaign in violation of the pay to play laws. period. Our campaign files quarterly reports that outline our fundraising. We do a detailed, more clear and comprehensive job than most in the state. Although I had explained this to the reporter, she chose to disregard it.
Fact No.2- Our campaign is extremely cautious on fundraising, but is not always perfect. The campaign has returned proactively more than $60,000 in donations that we felt represented conflicts or perceived conflicts. Not a lot of campaigns make it a habit to return money. I am proud of the lengths we go to without any fanfare to simply do the right thing.
Fact No.3- Every single donation the campaign receives is vetted by a group of volunteer good-government activists. Every donation is discussed and checked by regular people to ensure that our campaign is compliant with the letter of the law. You won't see any other campaign in Hudson County going to these lengths to create checks and balances.
Fact No.4- The Reporter article provides no facts and offers no comments for attribution. It is solely based on sources the reporter deems "politically connected." They are, of course, anonymous. I would suggest that responsible journalism requires more than this.
Fact No.5- The law firm referenced in the story has been working for the city and the Board of Education for 10 years. In other words, the firm has been engaged since long before I ever entered government. So much for the suggestion that I had anything to do with getting that firm placed in New Jersey.
Sadly, this is going to be an ugly campaign no matter how much we try to stay above the fray. The Healy plan is to try to show that everyone is as ethically challenged as he is, with the hope that apathy prevails in the end. I am going to do my best to keep the dialogue above that, but I won't be bashful about responding when the attacks are baseless, anonymous, and just plain wrong.
Steven Fulop
Your attempt to deflect from the very long laundry list of Jerry's ethical problems is obvious.
How many more people around Healy have to be found to be corrupt before people decide they need to replace him ?
Jerry Heally never seemed too concerned with his ethics or the massive corruption that surounds him.
Take you shots but that still doesn't change the fact that Fulop is the much better choice.
Jersey City government needs reform and Steve Fulop is the best chance to make that happen.
I think he should be replaced.
"However you have made it clear in all your comments below that you do not want anyone talking about anything Steve may have done wrong."
I think even you understand that Healy hold power has faded greatly and he may very well be removed from office in a few short weeks.
Your desperation to try to smear Fulop and anyone who stands up to you only makes Healy look worse if that is possible.
It just makes Healy look really desperate to hold on to his job.
Healy has been literally caught with his pants down too many times to belived.
Fulop has Healy running scared.
Guess you haven't been following this much.
Nice spin attempt. My best to your political bosses.
http://www.hudsonreporter.com/pages/full_story/push?article--Leaked Fulop e-mail references confidential -Cerf meeting- &id=19484352Read more: Hudson Reporter - News, Events, Classifieds, and Businesses in Hudson County, New Jersey
Still got your eyes closed? That is what he is hoping for.
The Hudson Reporter's credability being questioned again.
what else do you expect a political machine to do when cornered but unleash his letter writers. see below for the truth.
http://www.hudsonreporter.com/pages/full_story/push?article--Leaked Fulop e-mail references confidential -Cerf meeting- &id=19484352
Meeting with select members of the board of education plus newly elected though not seated boe members equals a violation of the spirit of the sunshine laws, though not a technical violation. Open and clean government? Seems like Steve only wants that when he's not involved.
A recent video interview shows him saying that he's always supported Obama, so what about his fundraiser for Hillary?
http://www.politickernj.com/clinton-raises-almost-400k-n-j-events-10633
Really, Healy is corrupt? I hadn't heard that before now. But you know what, that's not a reason for me to vote for Steve Fulop for Mayor. The only discernable message I have heard from Steve Fulop over the past three years is vote for me, I will reform and Healy is corrupt.
I have read it in print and watched Fulop say it in the video interview attached in the "Healy/Fulop Gloves Are OFF"...he says, "Watch what Healy does and not what he says". That's thought provoking and a que to the public that there is no need to think about what Fulop says versus what he does.
Well, you claim that Fulop "does the right thing unprompted" with respect to his return of campaign contributions. Since you are well-versed in the Pay-to-Play ordinances and intimately familiar with ELEC, then perhaps you can explain to me how he did not violate Pay-to-Play when he accepted $1,500 from IMPACT PAC the political fundraising arm of IMPACT JC-LLC, a City designated redeveloper, on 2/19/10 as reported in his ELEC filing dated April 19, 2010?
As you must know, he had 30 days from the applicable filing date (April 15, 2010) to return the contribution and avoid violating the ordinance. A check for returning the money was issued on June 2, 2010 as reported in his July 13, 2010 ELEC filing- JUNE 2ND IS THE SAME DAY THE JERSEY JOURNAL PUBLISHED THE ARTICLE ADDRESSING THE INCIDENT. That's called being prompted. That's called returning the money because you were caught violating the ordinance you championed in the news. That's called watch what I do and not what I say.
The same thing undoubtedly occurred with Spectra Energy's lawyers. You mean to tell me the Downtown City Councilman, who has Dale Hardman of "No Gas Pipeline" working on his campaign, had no idea that Decotiis represents the entity that is the scourge of Jersey City? You mean after the partners gave him $30,000 it was never once mentioned, "hey you know we represent Spectra Energy?" C'mon.
I'd say someone said to him, you better give that money back before people start asking questions. Questions like, did Steve Fulop write a single letter to any state or federal officials urging them to oppose the pipeline project? And if he did, did he stop after the Decotiis money started rolling in? But I know, you think he deserves a cookie for returning Spectra's influence peddling.
I am sure that Spectra's lawyers gave because they were all about his message of reform. They had no business friendly interest in exhibiting such generosity. The spirit of upholding Pay-to-Play reform was alive and well.
Seems like Steve ignored all of what's above and instead chose to attack the press for printing the truth.