Legislators who didn’t vote against earned sick leave when they were NJ Senators, then take 4 months of paid sick leave when it’s his own illness.
Absent four months with no explanation: that should be a problem for every voter, R or not.
Also: there are questions about the story he’s telling. One is that he was “hospitalized” for the depression:
From what I can tell this is very unusual.
For another thing: he’s said to have made a substantial number of stock-market trades during his hospitalization/depression.
It’s all up the voters, apparently. It doesn’t look as though Kean violated any current Congressional rules.
https://www.npr.org/2026/06/30/nx-s1-5876222/tom-kean-new-jersey-congress-depression
[my bolding in the quote]
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/30/tom-kean-jr-returns-house-absence-00981530
Just a theory.
Also: there are questions about the story he’s telling. One is that he was “hospitalized” for the depression:
I wonder if there was a suicide attempt, but I don’t expect an answer. I think “treatment for depression” is all the explanation he owes anyone. People can make their own decision based on that (and what he does for the next few months) if he’s fit for office. Anything more is just our natural curiosity, not actually something we need in order to pass judgment.
It doesn’t have to be an attempt. If they think you’re a suicide risk, they can put you in for evaluation.
I had a friend that was trapped in the system for 21 days. I’m sure the Congressman was able to get much more help than my friend did.
The hard part with depression is the diagnosis and finding the right balance of medications. After that, it’s just a chronic illness that needs to be managed.
It doesn’t look as though Kean violated any current Congressional rules.
“Current Congressional rules”? What are those?
For another thing: he’s said to have made a substantial number of stock-market trades during his hospitalization/depression.
Kean reported stock trades during his absence, as required by the House.
The sentence is ambiguous - did the trades occur in his absence, or did he report during his absence on trades that had happened before?
So it sounds like the OP had the right answer before they even finished the first sentence…
I think he has fallen victim to a shrink
Hehhh
The sentence is ambiguous - did the trades occur in his absence, or did he report during his absence on trades that had happened before?
From what I’ve read they were trades that occurred during the absence. (Sorry for the ambiguity.)
“Current Congressional rules”? What are those?
Heh.
In practice, mostly: "don’t get caught with a dead girl or a live boy, and try to use a bit of discretion with the cashing-in…"
From what I’ve read they were trades that occurred during the absence. (Sorry for the ambiguity.)
No problem - I figured the source of the quote was where the ambiguity came in. Thanks!