Democracy for New Mexico

(Updated) Hearing Saturday 3/3 on NM Impeachment Resolution

UPDATE 3/2/07: We have learned the bill may bypass the Senate Judicary Committee and go straight to the Senate Floor, probably to be heard there on Saturday morning. Please read this update post. Things can change quickly at this stage of the Legislative Session!
*************

Here's the latest on the NM Impeachment resolution, SJR 5, which has so far passed both the NM Senate Rules Committee and the Senate Public Affairs Committee. Next up: Senate Judiciary sometime Saturday, March 3. We need to show up en masse for the hearing and contact Judicary members NOW. This email is from a volunteer aide to Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, who sponsored the bill with Sen. John Grubesic:

From: Desi Brown:
Hello to all! (Please forward to others interested in this issue.) I am sorry I was unable to be present for the exciting success of the Public Affairs Committee Hearing last Sunday. On behalf of Senator Ortiz y Pino and the rest of his volunteer staff, I would like to personally thank all of you who could attend, speak up, or help out in the many ways that you have.

We would like to acknowledge that everyone at these hearings really seems to understand the power of the citizenry to affect change within our government and at the same time, you have all honored the wishes of both Senator Ortiz y Pino and Senator Grubesic to stay focused on the language of the Impeachment Resolution. Thank you!

Just a quick update - there will be more to come later this week:

- SJR5 is tentatively scheduled to be heard in the Senate Judiciary committee late Saturday afternoon this weekend. The committee will start meeting after the Senate floor session is done and there will probably be a few bills heard before this one is. This makes the timing a little bit uncertain for all of you who may wish to attend.

- Right now we cannot say whether the bill will be heard at 3 PM or 8 PM, or any time in between. If you do plan to be present on Saturday just be prepared for a potentially long wait as of now. (Note: You can also call the office of Senator Cisco McSorley for updated time information: 505-986-4485.)

- We hope to be able to narrow down the time frame in the next day or two.

- There will be a taped video conference call from former US Congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman run during this committee hearing.

- There will probably be a limited amount of public debate again - similar to last time - but the more people packed into the room and in the hallways the better! It really helps to create an air of excitement.

- We will try to have both a pre- and post-committee hearing gathering in the Rotunda to share what information we may have with you.

Keep up with your calls, e-mails, radio show call-ins, letters to the editor (I have only seen a couple so far - keep writing!), personal visits with the Senators and Representatives (and their assistants), and just plain old getting the word out to the general public!

Contact Other Senators Too
Please note that if SJR5 passes through Judiciary, it could hit the Senate Floor fairly quickly, so don't ignore other members of the Senate who haven't heard this in committee yet.

Strategy Note: We are currently trying to reinforce the concept to other Senators that this Resolution is mostly focused on encouraging Congress to open congressional investigations into the improper (yes, illegal) actions that have been taken by our leaders. If these investigations pan out (and how couldn?t they?!), then Congress can pursue the avenue of Impeachment.

- So basically, try to put more of an emphasis on the congressional investigations than the impeachment when dealing with any legislators who may be sitting on the fence regarding SJR5.

That's all for now. Thanks again for all of your wonderful support!

Desi Brown, (505)256-0668, desibrown@comcast.net
**************
Editor's Note: Contact info for Senate Judiciary Committee can be found here. Especially important to contact are:

• Sen. Lidio Rainaldi (D-Gallup), 505-986-4310
• Sen. Michael Sanchez (D-Belen), 505-986-4727
• Richard Martinez (D-Espanola), 505-986-4389

They are most likely the swing votes on the committee. Also, Senator Sanchez is the Senate Floor Leader and has much power in determining what gets heard and when on the Senate Floor should this resolution be passed by Judiciary and be awaiting scheduling for a vote by the full Senate. In other words, he can make sure it gets to the floor, or that delays stop it. He also has significant leverage with House members, so he'll be instrumental in the determination of which House committees will hear the resolution IF it passes the Senate.

**Please speak to the Senator or his staff directly if you can. Be polite, be clear, and stress that we want to convince the U.S. House to open important investigations into the conduct of Bush and Cheney related to the Iraq war.**

Listen: Public radio KUNM's website has an item on last Saturday's Public Affairs Committee hearing of the resolution with short audio clips of Sen. Ortiz y Pino and Albuquerque activist Dallas Timmons. Click here.

Also be sure to check our impeachment post archive for previous posts on this topic plus links to video, audio and media stories about this effort.

(Updated) New Mexico Democrats: Move Now to Capture Domenici's Senate Seat

UPDATE: Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo reports that many reporters are staking out Sen. Domenici and Rep. Wilson today, trying to get a response to the Iglesias story. Nothing yet.
*******************

On the heels of the unfolding scandal about what looks to be the very improper firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and seven others, Jonathan Singer at MyDD echoes the calls I'm hearing from many Democrats in New Mexico. Democrats should go after Pete Domenici's Senate seat in a serious, organized way. Recommended start? How about Rep. Tom Udall, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, Mayor Marty Chavez, or other A-list candidates rethinking a challenge against Domenici? And how about some spending on tv and/or radio ads calling Domenici (and Rep. Heather Wilson) out on alleged conduct unbecoming in the firing of U.S. Attorney David Iglesias? Singer says:

I have written for some time that New Mexico's aging Republican Senator, Pete Domenici, should be among the Democrats' top targets in 2008, not only because his conservative views are way outside of the mainstream -- particularly for a state as balanced politically as New Mexico -- but also because his Jim Bunning-like actions (walking around the Senate in pajama bottoms) raise real questions about his competence to serve another six years. But new questions surrounding the possibility that Domenici abused his office for partisan political reasons should further enlarge the target on the Senator's back.

...  the headline remains that Domenici potentially used his office for partisan political gain, a big no-no, as it were. And given the possibility that Domenici just might not be up to a heated campaign that not only questions his fitness to serve but also his intentions and trustworthiness, it's incumbent upon the Democrats, both inside New Mexico and those trying to extend the party's majority in the U.S. Senate, to begin to put pressure on Domenici to retire rather than stand for reelection, as he has indicated an intention to do.

If this means an investment of $50,000 of $100,000 today for television and newspaper ads throughout New Mexico calling Domenici out for his alleged actions I think it would certainly be worth it.

Additionally the Democrats also need to ramp up their recruitment drive in the state. A number of potential Democratic heavyweights -- Rep. Tom Udall and Albuquerque mayor Martin Chavez, to take two examples -- have stated an unwillingness to run for the Senate in 2008 if Domenici were to run for reelection. Yet if they, or other candidates of their potential strength, were to flirt with a run today, they might, along with an ad buy by the DSCC or the Democratic Party of New Mexico, be able to sufficiently scare Domenici so that he decides against seeking another term. There is little potential downside to such a move but great potential upside, and as such there seems to be little reason to me why such a combined effort should not be undertaken at this point. [emphasis mine]

Come on folks. Imagine what would be going on if a Democratic Senator and Representative were being implicated in a rapidly expanding political scandal like this one. And yet, the Democratic Party of New Mexico has yet (to my knowledge) even issued a press release on this story or provided a quote to the media. Wake up out there!

The worst thing that could happen would be for NM Dems to sit on their hands while Repubs set up a plan to make excuses for Domenici's and Wilson's alleged outrageous conduct. Imagine a scenario where they manage to save enough of Wilson's reputation to insert her into the race for Senate at the last moment, with Domenici withdrawing. I could go on with possible scenarios, but the key point is that in politics, you have to strike when the iron is hot. Like now.

Dem-Sponsored DOMA Bill Gains Passage in NM Senate Public Affairs

From Equality New Mexico:
By a vote of 5-4, Senate Bill 816, Senator Lidio Rainaldi’s Definition of Marriage Act received a “Do Pass” recommendation out of the Senate Public Affairs Committee. After a very muddled, confusing and often offensive presentation from Senator Rainaldi (D-Gallup), the Committee heard testimony from the audience.

Once again, those in opposition to the DOMA far outnumbered those in support. The testimony was moving and heartfelt and helped to swing the vote of Sen. Mary Kay Papen (D-Las Cruces) to our side. In a vote that she clearly struggled with, Sen. Papen voted to table the Bill and when that motion was defeated, voted “Do Not Pass.” Two years ago, Sen. Papen supported the DOMA. We are making progress! (Editor's Note: You might want to contact Sen. Papen and thank her for her support.)

For a brief moment it seemed as if we might have a chance at tabling the DOMA. However, Sen. David Ulibarri (D-Cibola, Socorro & Valencia), the swing vote on the committee, ended up voting to support the DOMA. Sen. Ulibarri seemed to struggle with his vote and explained that he thought it needed more scrutiny in Senate Judiciary. Sen. Ulibarri is a freshman Senator who may very well be swayable on these issues, but clearly needs more education.

SB 816 is now on its way to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It will be very difficult to defeat this legislation in the Senate, but we must continue to try.

THERE ARE ONLY 17 DAYS LEFT IN THE SESSION - CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO EQNM’S LOBBYING EFFORTS

Political Fragging: Fired U.S. Attorney Iglesias Drops Bombshell on NM Repubs

In a story that continues to explode on the national scene, New Mexico's U.S. Attorney David Iglesias, who was recently fired by the federal Justice Department and accused of bad performance, held a news conference on his last day in office yesterday to defend his record as a federal prosecutor and blame politics for his firing. Even more damning, he told McClatchy Newspapers that he was called by two members of the NM Congressional delegation about a month prior to the 2006 election and asked pointedly about when he would announce indictments in a case involving possible criminal counts related to two state courthouse projects, as well as queried about details in the case.

In response to Iglesias' revelations, both a U.S. House Justice subcommitee and the U.S. Senate Justice Committee are considering issuing subpoenas to Iglesias and several other U.S. attorneys fired by the Bush administration under similar circumstances. The subpoenas would compel the attorneys to testify about their firings before the Congressional committees, and Iglesias has said he would comply with the orders if issued. In recent weeks, it was announced that six U.S. attorneys around the country, including Iglesias, would be removed from office and replaced by the Bush administration due to alleged "performance issues." Two others are also being replaced for unstated reasons. Many are asking questions about the real reasons behind the firings.

Soon after Iglesias' statements about calls from members of Congress were made public, Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM2) said he wasn't one of those who called Iglesias. Rep.Tom Udall (D-NM2) and Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-NM) also denied they were the callers. That leaves just two possible culprits -- Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM1) and Sen. Pete Domenici (R-NM) -- and so far their offices have refused comment to the media. It has long been rumored that Wilson and Domenici may have been pressuring Iglesias to bring the courthouse case indictments before the election in November 2006 in order to help Rep. Wilson's reelection prospects against Dem challenger Patricia Madrid. In a tight race, Wilson ultimately beat out Madrid by a razor thin margin of less than 900 votes.

A post yesterday on The Carpetbagger Report by Steve Benen, the lead editor of Salon.com's Daou Report, had this to say, citing stories published by TPMmuckraker.com and McClatchy Newspapers:

Yesterday, David Iglesias, the U.S. Attorney for New Mexico, described his firing as “political fragging.” Iglesias added, “I’m OK with being asked to move on for political reasons, I’m NOT OK with the Department of Justice wrongfully testifying under oath to the Senate Judiciary Committee that I had performance issues.”

Today, Iglesias started airing the dirty laundry.

The U.S. attorney from New Mexico who was recently fired by the Bush administration said Wednesday that he believes he was forced out because he refused to rush an indictment in an ongoing probe of local Democrats a month before November’s Congressional elections.

David Iglesias said two members of Congress separately called in mid October to inquire about the timing of an ongoing probe of a kickback scheme and appeared eager for an indictment to be issued on the eve of the elections in order to benefit the Republicans. He refused to name the members of Congress because he said he feared retaliation.

Two months later, on Dec. 7, Iglesias became one of six U.S. attorneys ordered to step down for what administration officials have termed “performance-related issues.” Two other U.S. attorneys also have been asked to resign.

Iglesias, whose performance reviews included no criticisms, said, “I believe that because I didn’t play ball, so to speak, I was asked to resign.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) responded by noting that Iglesias’ allegations are “extremely serious and very troubling allegations coming from a man of great integrity. They call into question every other firing.”

... now that we know partisan prosecutions played a role in the purge, it should renew interest in the administration’s decision to fire San Diego U.S. Attorney Carol Lam during her Duke Cunningham investigation.

The McClatchy Newspaper story also reported:

Iglesias acknowledged that he had no proof that the pressure from the members of Congress prompted his forced resignation. But he said the contact violated one of the most important tenets of a U.S. attorney's office: Don't mix politics with prosecutions.

"I was appalled by the inappropriateness of those contacts," Iglesias said of the calls.

... Iglesias said the two members of Congress not only contacted him directly, but also tried to wrest details of the case from him.

An article in today's Albuquerque Journal adds more to this story,

There has been grumbling for months within the state Republican Party and legal community that the investigation into possible contract padding in state courthouse construction projects has been conducted at a snail's pace. The original allegations— involving contractors, public officials and millions of dollars— were brought to the U.S. attorney and the FBI more than 18 months ago.

... And Iglesias told the Journal after the news conference that he began losing the support of important state Republican Party leaders after the 2004 election when he didn't prosecute anyone for voter fraud.

Also check out this post on Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo that cites information first published by the New Mexico Politics with Joe Monahan blog. Monahan's coverage of the story continues today, including speculation about the possible political fallout that may damage the political futures of Rep. Wilson and Sen. Domenici (above right) due to the unethical nature of the accusations. More will be revealed.