Democracy for New Mexico

(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.

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.

NM House Passes Death Penalty Repeal

From the NM House Democratic Leadership:
A bill to abolish the death penalty in New Mexico and replace it with a sentence of life without parole passed the House of Representatives today on a floor vote of 41 to 28. Six Republicans supported the legislation. Similar legislation was passed by the NM House in 2005 and defeated in the Senate Judiciary Committee by one vote.

Rep. Chasey has proposed three pieces of legislation that work together as a package to support the victims of crime. HB 190 and HB 966 propose that the death penalty be replaced with life without parole and that a portion of the funds saved by the state, which is estimated to be as much as $3 to $4 million dollars a year, be used to expand services for murder victim family members. HB 193 protects the employment of all crime victims when they must take unpaid leave from their jobs to attend court hearings.

Rep. Gail Chasey (D-Albuquerque) has sponsored similar legislation since 1999. During Rep. Chasey’s presentation on the bill, she said that the death penalty discriminates against people of color and those who live in rural areas or are poor. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 53% of men and women on death row are African American or Hispanic. The Hispanic population on death row nationally is growing at the fastest rate when compared to other ethnic/racial groups.

Rep. Chasey also said that the death penalty was not a deterrent to murder. She quoted crime statistics that indicated that the murder rates in the southern part of the country where higher than all other regions. In 2006, 83% of all executions in the country were carried out in the south.

Rep. Chasey emphasized that New Mexico spends millions of dollars a year on the capital punishment system even though we have had only one execution since 1960. There are currently two men on death row in New Mexico and about 20 capital murder cases making there way through the court system.

Rep. Antonio Maestas (D-Albuquerque) spoke in support of repeal of the death penalty as a former prosecutor. He explained that resources are diverted away from prosecuting violent crimes, such as rape and assault, when a death penalty case takes precedence in a district attorney’s office. He suggested that the state needs to scrutinize all of its expenditures very carefully when we live in a world of scarce resources. “It astounds me that the state will spend millions of dollars every year on the death penalty when we’ve had one execution in 47 years. If this money was being spent on any other program with the same result, we would be laughed out of town,” he said. “Imagine if we allocated $50 million dollars to an economic development program and they reported back to us after a year that they had created one small business.”

Editor's Notes:

Report from Floor Debate: Local blogger Heath Hausaman was up at the Legislature at the floor session during the debate on this bill, and provides a running report how that went.

Contact Gov. Richardson and NM Senators: Although Gov. Bill Richardson has supported the death penalty in years past, there's a chance he may change his mind this year, especially if he hears from numerous voters who support death penalty repeal. According to an Albuquerque Journal article:

Richardson, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 2008, has refused to answer questions this year about his position on death penalty legislation. He said he is focused on the items on his legislative agenda. Chasey said the governor continued to have "very cordial conversations" with death penalty opponents. "I think he's giving it some thought," she said.

Click to FAIR Blogcontact Gov. Richarson or contact your State Senator on this issue.

UPDATED: Bill to Abolish the Death Penalty Moves to NM House Floor

UPDATE 2/9/07: HB 190--Abolish the Death Penalty Will Have a Floor Vote on Monday, February 12th. The House usually convenes at 10:30 AM and bills begin to be voted on at about 11:30 AM. At this point  it is impossible to be more precise about the schedule.

Please contact the Representatives below. Call their office today and Monday (starting at 8:00 AM) or send them an email over the weekend. Please make the emails very short--2 to 3 sentences are plenty. Calls and emails should always be extremely polite and respectful.

Rep. Thomas Garcia is new so has never voted on the issue. The other Reps voted against repeal in 2005 but are thoughtful legislators who value hearing from their constituents. Thanks for your help and support.

Kathleen MacRae, Director
NM Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty
PO Box 8552, Santa Fe, NM 87504
505-986-9536 x22 or 505-681-3920
kmacrae@nmrepeal.org

Contact these Reps:
Rep. Joseph Cervantes, 986-4249   
cervanteslaw@zianet.com
    
Rep. John Heaton, 986-4432
jheaton@caverns.com
    
Rep. Dona Irwin, 986-4249   
donagale@zianet.com

Rep. Kathy McCoy, 986-4214
katrina@swcp.com

Rep. Jane Powdrell-Culbert, 986-4467
jpandp@comcast.net
    
Rep. Thomas Garcia, 986-4242
ocate@hotmail.com

*************************************
From the NM House Leadership:
Santa Fe, NM – A bill to abolish the death penalty received a do pass recommendation from the House Judiciary Committee yesterday with a 9 to 3 vote. House Bill 190 will now move to the House floor. The measure had previously passed the House Public Affairs Committee by a 4-3 margin. An almost identical bill to repeal the death penalty and institute the sentence of life without parole, passed the House of Representatives in 2005 with a bi-partisan vote of 38 to 31.

Rep. Gail Chasey has sponsored similar legislation since 1999. During testimony she said that the death penalty discriminates against people of color and those who live in rural areas or are poor. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 53% of men and women on death row are African American or Hispanic.

Rep. Chasey emphasized that the state spends millions of dollars a year on the capital punishment system even though New Mexico has had only one execution since 1960. Andrea Vigil, whose husband was murdered in Santa Fe seven years ago, asked that state resources be used to expand services for the families who have lost a loved one to murder not to continue the death penalty system.

Rep. Antonio Maestas (D-Albuquerque) spoke in support of repeal of the death penalty as a former prosecutor. He explained how resources are diverted away from prosecuting other violent crimes when a death penalty case takes precedence. He suggested that the state needs to scrutinize all of its expenditures very carefully when we live in a world of scarce resources. “It astounds me that the state will spend millions of dollars every year on the death penalty when we’ve had one execution in 47 years. If this money was being spent on any other program with the same result, we would be laughed out of town,” he said. “Imagine if we allocated $50 million dollars to an economic development program and they reported back to us after a year that they had created one small business.”

Rep. Elias Barela (D-Valencia) also supported death penalty repeal. He said, “I think it is inconsistent that people will see life in a stem cell, but will not recognize it sitting in a jail cell.”

Editor's Note: The New Mexico Coalition to Repeal the Death Penalty is a primary advocacy group that is fighting to abolish the death penalty in the state and provides many resources on the issue. It's organizational members include:

• Indian Bar Association
• Marketing Communications Group, Inc.
• Murder Victims' Families for Reconciliation-NM
• NAACP-NM
• National Association of Social Workers-NM
• NM Catholic Conference
• NM Conference of Churches
• NM Criminal Defense Lawyers Association
• NM Public Health Association

Email Gov. Richardson on Progressive Eyewitness ID Reform Bill

The national blog TalkLeft has a post on NM Senate Bill 5, including a good description of what the bill would do and why it's needed. The story is also crossposted at DailyKos. The legislation is sponsored by Sen. John Grubesic (D-Santa Fe) and addresses the problem of mistaken eyewitness identification, the most common cause of wrongful convictions. The bill has already been passed by the Senate Public Affairs Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee, and heads next to the NM Senate Floor. It may be voted on as early as today.

The bill is supported by the state's criminal defense attorneys, the American Civil Liberties Union and Barry Scheck's Innocence Project, among others. In a letter urging the adoption of such measures, Scheck called NM's bill "an excellent model" that "incorporates many of the scientifically documented 'best practices' for eyewitness reform."

Unfortunately, the eyewitness ID reform bill is being fought by NM Attorney General Gary King and law enforcement agencies. To urge your State Senator to support this bill, click here. We also need Governor Richardson to step in and support this bill. As the Talk Left post says:

New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson wants to be the Democrats' nominee for President. A good way for him to begin the journey would be to endorse Senate Bill 5 and show he values justice and is willing to be smart, not tough, on crime. Send him an e-mail and urge him to support this bill.

(Thanks to Tim O'Toole for the heads up on this.)