Several New Jersey papers weigh in on yesterday's comments by Assembly Speaker Joseph Roberts that the Clean Elections pilot program in the state will be suspended for 2009. The overarching theme seems to be that while a few legitimate fixes to the program would be welcome, abandoning it entirely because of one court case in Arizona is wrong-headed and ultimately harmful to the voters of New Jersey.

Eh, well this isn't the best news I've read all day. A U.S. District Judge, Roslyn Silver - taking a page from the Supreme Court's decision on the Millionaire's Amendment - has ruled that the matching funds provision of the Arizona Clean Elections law is unconstitutional. While this has no immediate affect on the distribution of Clean Elections grants in Arizona, it may gum up the works down the road.

The Center for Governmental Studies has released a study of New Jersey's Clean Elections pilot program and it is overwhelmingly positive. While offering a few recommendations for improvement (chief among them expanding the system to primaries and making a better effort on behalf of third parties) the Center thinks the system should be expanded and "could be a state-wide success."

Clean Elections got its share of attention over the last few days. The primary elections in Connecticut that saw both a higher number of contested races and a high participation from Clean Elections candidates drew this story in the New York Times about the new system that includes perspectives from several state lawmakers. Stories popped up this weekend in New Jersey and Wisconsin as well.

New Jersey's Courier Post has given the state's Clean Elections program quite positive coverage so it's a little disappointing to see this article's headline that gets a little Chicken Little about the future of the Clean Elections pilot program.

The Courier-Post weighs in on what the ramifications of the Supreme Court ruling on the Millionaire's Amendment might be for the New Jersey Clean Elections program.  Sen Bill Baroni (R), a fervent backer of Clean Elections, criticizes the decision that "certainly does nothing to advance the cause of cleaning up politics."  The 2007 cycle of the state's Clean Elections program was very successful -- a good counterweight to any arguments for it being significantly altered.