Congressman Garrett has remained neutral toward the presidential race and stands out among New Jersey Republicans with some of his voting record. He is rated libertarian-leaning and voted against warrantless electronic surveillance. Shulman has some prominent Democratic endorsements from which he may want to distance himself, not the least of which is Senator Lautenberg for his comments on Dubai.

Affluent voting block will aid incumbent E. Scott Garrett(R) to retain his seat in New Jersey's 5th District. The 5th District is a rural and suburban Republican stronghold since 1981, switching from Democrat with the Reagan election. The median income is $53,433, the top third of the country, and the population is predominately white middle class with 71% white collar jobs. Democratic challenger Dennis Shulman, will have a real challenge in turning this district back to the left in the November election.

New Jersey's 5th Congressional District Representative Scott Garrett met with two students at his Washington office who helped raise $8,543 for the Save Darfur Coalition. The students from Washington Middle School in Ridgewood, were among the thousands of students nationally who have raised more the $112,000 for Save Darfur.

“I am proud of these young students and their dedication to alleviating the suffering in Darfur. Their imaginative fundraising and awareness campaign has drawn attention to the needs of millions of Sudanese citizens. I have worked to support and protect the victims in Darfur and I am honored that schools like Washington Middle have joined me in continuing to fight for an end to the atrocities and violence.”

Garrett has a strong stance on the crisis in Darfur, believing the UN should send peackeeping forces and make a stronger effort to curtail the violence. Unfortunately, China continues to block any resolutions to that effect.

Scott Garrett has a sizable lead in the fund raising campaigns over his opponent as of their last financial reporting. His lead is largely the result of superior PAC conributions which make up nearly 60% of his raised funds.

Garrett Votes No on Bailout

Listening to his constituents, Garrett voted against the bailout. He believes that free market mechanisms should be the solution.

“We should look for new solutions. I will close on this, Mr. Speaker. The noted University of Chicago economist Robert Shimmer tells us the U.S. has long been a beacon of free markets in the world. When economic conditions turned sour in Argentina and Indonesia, we give clear instructions on what to do: balance the budget, cut government employment, and don't prop up failing enterprises.

“Those approaches by the U.S. are clear. But when the U.S. ignores its own advice in this situation, it reduces our credibility in the future. Rewriting the rules of the game at this stage will therefore have serious ramifications not only for the people in this country, but for the future of the globe. The social causes are far, far greater than any $700 billion. I yield back.”

Rep. Scott Garrett (R) appeared on the FOX Business Special Report to address the government's activities in the bailout of major financial institutions such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Lehman Brothers.

Garrett claims that the federal government"...has been sending mixed signals to the market, [...] that have at some degree but not entirely set us up for failure at this point in time."

He is quick to warn investors about the economic ramifications of waiting around for the government to "step in" and bail out these institutions who find themselves on the decline.

As economic analysts ask themselves how the regulatory measures for companies such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac never made it past the Senate floor, Garrett argues that you should "follow the money...look at all the contributions both directly from the lobbyists for the GSEs and also from their foundations as well to the various members of Congress to see where that money went, and you'll see why the appropriate regulation never got through until too late."

He continues to predict that next week as the head of the Treasury face Congress "everybody will pointing their finger at Paulson and saying, 'Well, we counted on you, you assurances that nothing would happen when we gave you this authority'". These same people, Garrett notes, are the same people who granted Paulson, the head of the Treasury, this same authority earlier this summer.

Inevitably, Garrett is only asking for consistency on the part of the federal government in addressing the current market woes and a direct effort towards a stated goal to which legislation can begin to be implemented. He doesn't so much agree that tighter regulations are the answer (as some Democrats would argue) but he's adamant about a consistent focus on the part of our government officials in response to what is happening on Wall Street.