Before departing for the Fourth of July holiday weekend, the Assembly and Senate pushed through a controversial furlough bill impacting public workers, but not without a few partisan fireworks over Gov. Phil Murphy's timing. It was swiftly signed by the governor.

In remote conference call voting on July 2, the bill, A-4132, passed the Assembly 51-25 with two abstentions, and passed the Senate 23-16.

The governor signed the bill later that night. "The revisions sent back to the Legislature strengthen this legislation by taking advantage of existing programs to ensure cost savings for the State while still protecting our workforce," Murphy said in a release that went out to the media just after 9:30 p.m.

Earlier in the day, no Republican in either house—25 in the 80-member Assembly, and 15 in the 40-member Senate—voted in favor of A-4132, which, by its description, enhances certain rights of public workers to benefits and leave, and assists certain laid-off workers.

Several spoke up before casting their "no" votes, contending that Murphy, a Democrat, missed an opportunity to achieve "real savings" by wasting seven weeks after the original bipartisan bill landed on his desk. The governor conditionally vetoed A-4132 on June 29, proposing substantial changes.

Republicans contend the "new bill" doesn't achieve nearly the savings to fund property tax relief programs and is "too little too late" as the state's reopening is now calling workers back to their jobs.

Republicans claim Murphy left federal money on the table as the state was sinking into a fiscal abyss because of the pandemic-induced lockdown. They claim the governor two months ago could have furloughed workers who were sitting unable to work but still collecting full state paychecks at taxpayers' expense, instead of the federal government picking up the tab.

The Republican Minority Caucus sounded off in a letter July 2 addressed to Murphy. In it, they contend the governor "had the ability under the CARES Act to shift much of that cost to the federal government for months," and those affected workers would have made more money with the extra $600 of weekly "Pandemic Unemployment Compensation" appropriated through the federal CARES Act—benefits set to expire before the end of July—while they were sidelined.

Instead, the Republicans argue, Murphy dug the state deeper into a hole.

"The Legislature approved a bill (S-2350/A-4132) in mid-May allowing the State to more easily and quickly furlough public workers," said the letter. "Had you signed the bill into law and implemented furloughs immediately, the State could have taken greater advantage of generous federal unemployment benefits that would have paid more to most furloughed employees than they were making during that time by remaining on the State payroll while at home and not working."

In the same letter, the Republican caucus contends that one week after the Legislature sent the comprehensive furlough bill to Murphy, the governor announced a voluntary furlough program that it says has been underused.

On June 23, Murphy announced that the Communications Workers of America (CWA) of New Jersey reached an agreement with the state to implement furloughs in lieu of layoffs and to defer planned cost-of-living adjustments on wages, among other cost-saving measures.

The Governor's Office didn't immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the Republicans' criticism over Murphy's handling of A-4132. But in the release announcing the governor signing it, Murphy said the recommendations outlined in his conditional veto include eliminating changes to Unemployment Insurance law in the bill that would shift the cost of covering workers from the federal government to the state.

Murphy said under the CARES Act, individuals who are not eligible for state unemployment benefits can receive up to 39 weeks of unemployment benefits until Dec. 31, 2020, ensuring that they are covered. "These revisions will ensure that pension, health benefits, and civil service rights are maintained during the period of any furlough taken during the State's response to the COVID-19 pandemic," said the governor. "The revisions also allow schools that are providing virtual instruction to participate in furlough programs."

But Republicans weren't buying it.

"This doesn't even come close to the bill passed two months ago," said Assemblyman John DiMaio, R-Hunterdon, earlier on July 2, during his two minutes allotted to debate the bill in the lower house. "We lost $500,000 in savings … because of the governor's lack of action."

Sen. Steven Oroho, R-Sussex, the Republican Minority Caucus budget officer, asked to take his name off as sponsor of the original bill when it came time for the Senate vote.

"On May 4 we introduced a bill that we were proud of. Now it's a massively changed bill and actual savings have become phantom savings," said Oroho.

Newly minted Republican Sen. Michael Testa, R-Cape May, who won the Senate seat last fall vacated by Jeff Van Drew, who left for Congress, went after Murphy hard.

Testa urged the governor "to wake up and stop ignoring the crisis and stop ignoring the Legislature."

"This new bill paves the way for a deal the governor made with the CWA," said Testa. "It's a huge squandered opportunity for taxpayers."

As Testa heaped praise on Senate President Steve Sweeney, D-Gloucester, the state's second-most-powerful politician and prime sponsor of the original A-4132 bill, Sweeney listened in silence.

In the end, the measure had more than enough votes to pass, including that of Sweeney, who substituted the original bill for S-2350 and shepherded it through the chamber two months ago.