For commuters in New York and New Jersey, Sept. 9 was just another day — until they reached the George Washington Bridge that connects the two states.
The traffic jam was unusually rotten that day, taking some drivers three to four hours to reach their destination.
As it turned out, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey closed two of three lanes on the bridge. What was originally thought to be a “traffic study,” turned out to be nothing more than political retribution.
It turns out a top aide to New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie emailed David Wildstein, Christie’s close friend and appointee to the Port Authority, asking him to cause traffic problems in Fort Lee, N.J., home of an entrance to the George Washington Bridge.
Why?
Mark Sokolich, the mayor of Fort Lee, didn’t endorse Christie’s bid for re-election last fall.
Stay classy, New Jersey.
The fallout is just beginning. Christie fired the aide who pushed the idea, and Wildstein testified to what happened on Wednesday — although he pled the Fifth for every question asked. Meanwhile, Christie denied any and all knowledge of what his staff did and held a nearly two-hour press conference to defend himself.
Whether Christie is complicit in all of this hardly matters. What matters is just how low some are willing to go for political gain or political retribution. Some small-town mayor, who’s not even in the same political party as Christie, refuses to endorse him, so we have to make the lives of ordinary citizens miserable?
It might possibly be a new low in American politics. Christie’s ambitions are far higher than governor, and many pundits have already tapped him as a top Republican contender for the 2016 presidential election. The bridge incident calls into question Christie’s ability to run for president and lead the country.
The bridge situation sets up one of two possibilities: Christie either wanted revenge against the mayor of Fort Lee because he didn’t endorse Christie, which makes the governor a bully, or he didn’t know what his top staffers were doing, which makes him incompetent.
Regardless of what he did or didn’t know, this is not the man I want running the country. As president, if Christie’s slighted by a foreign leader, does he exact revenge by killing trade deals, enforcing sanctions or invading their country? What if Christie, unaware of what his top staff does, lets them get away with using the White House as a tool for political retribution against other elected officials?
Sure, it’s a hyperbolic thought, but Christie’s ability to put his job ahead of politics is now called into question. Christie’s image is sure to tarnish as a result, and his pathway to the 2016 Republican nomination was just clouded by an ongoing investigation.
The state Assembly has started looking into the matter, and it could grow worse for Christie because his office is also being investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s office — Christie’s former job — and the FBI’s public corruption unit.
Anyone who thinks Christie could waltz through the Republican primary and subsequently the 2016 presidential election ought to reconsider that notion. Although Christie’s an affable, no-nonsense politician with bipartisan support, his office at the very least caused a nightmare for average Americans all because he didn’t get what he wanted.
Is this the person you want leading our country for the second half of this decade?
The last time we had a president this skilled in the art of political retribution, it didn’t work out well.
His name was Richard Milhous Nixon, and the rest is history.
Joel Mendelson is a UF grad student in political campaigning. His columns appear on Mondays. A version of this column ran on page 6 on 1/13/2014 under the headline "Gov. Chris Christie’s bridge to nowhere"
