A message to New Jersey Globe readers
Last week, I filed a complaint with the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission after the second gubernatorial debate sponsored by WABC-TV in New York and WPVI-TV in Philadelphia fell a few minutes short of a statutory requirement that debates for governor and lieutenant governor “shall be of at least one hour’s duration.”
As a remedy, I asked that ELEC award replacement debates.
Gubernatorial candidates receive $10.5 million in matching funds, and the taxpayers require just two things in return: agree to a $18 million spending cap – not so hard since they can direct donors to super PACs and independent expenditure committees — and participate in two debates of at least one hour in length. That’s a good deal for Mikie Sherrill and Jack Ciattarelli.
New Jersey has fewer reporters than ever. And because New Jersey has no network television affiliates of its own, Jersey gets screwed all the time on local news. There’s a lot of Mamdani and Cuomo and Krassner and Shapiro – but not so much Sherrill and Ciattarelli.
There is absolutely no harm to the public in requiring the candidates to debate again. Frankly, there is an extraordinary benefit to the public who would have the opportunity to hear more from the candidates, as is their right under state law.
ELEC issued an order to show cause on Friday and scheduled a special meeting for this morning. But on Monday, ELEC moved the meeting to Friday at 2 PM. They know that means there won’t be a decision before the judiciary closes up for the weekend, and they’re aware that the legal deadline to hold debates is October 24. I remain hopeful that this isn’t a deliberate attempt by ELEC to run out the clock.
After the lieutenant governor debate between Dale Caldwell and Jim Gannon clocked in a few minutes short, I contacted ELEC’s director of compliance, Aurea Vasquez-Alexander, in writing on October 1, 2025, to remind her of the statutory requirement. Six days later, Vasquez-Alexander responded: “Regarding your inquiry related to the New Jersey Gubernatorial debates, please be advised that the PIX 11 Lieutenant Governor debate was between 56 minutes and 57 minutes long. This hour-long debate is in alignment with past ELEC-designated gubernatorial debates airing on network television. Similarly, the October 8 hour-long debate will also align with past ELEC-designated gubernatorial debates airing on network television.”
Later that day, Niki Hawkins of WPVI-TV, on behalf of herself and John Antonio, the Vice President of News at WABC-TV, New York, advised candidates: “Due to production considerations, we will start the debate at 6:59 PM EST. Please make note of it.” Still, the debate started after 6:59 PM EST and its duration was less than the one hour required by statute.
The sponsors, aware of their legal obligation to produce a one-hour debate for the public, opted to pause the production roughly halfway through to air commercials. In other words, the sponsors voluntarily chose to monetize their time rather than fulfill their agreement with the commission.
In my complaint, I noted that Ms. Vasquez-Alexander’s claim that a debate falling short of the one-hour duration is somehow within a staff-approved margin of error was unacceptable. Neither the Commission nor its staff has the legal authority to work outside the parameters of the statute arbitrarily; indeed, by the very nature of its name, the Commission was created to ensure that election laws under its authority are enforced. Perhaps, in retrospect, it would have been better for the Commission’s Compliance staff to enforce the statute rather than excuse it.
While it may be easier to believe that a couple of minutes is insignificant, I must remind the Commission that history is full of debates where a single answer, a matter of just mere seconds, has the potential to affect the outcome of an election. And that’s what debates are intended to do: help voters make their decision.
And details like meeting the required minimum time are hardly trivial: I would imagine that the Commission would strictly enforce a violation for a candidate accepting a contribution that was just one dollar above the legal limit. Candidates who have participated in ELEC’s public financing program have noted that small, perhaps even insignificant, details have held up their funding.
It’s fair to question whether ELEC ought not arbitrarily pick and choose which regulations to rigidly enforce.
Wildstein ELEC Complaint
