Democracy for New Mexico

Fooling Around: Hey Joe, Where's That Ethics Contest Winner?

Mr. Monahan: I echo the call for answers posted at m-pyre:

Monahan’s contest had a deadline of March 8, with results to be announced on the 30th. You can see the details of the contest here. Essentially, he offered $500 to the student who developed the best “lobbying/PR” ethics reform plan for next year’s legislative session. Despite the fact that this contest is totally passive-aggressive, I never discount the creativity of young people. I want to see the results. Well, Joe?

Yeah, who won the contest and the $500 prize? Enquiring minds want to know.

For more background see my previous posts on this:

• February 11, 2008: Ethics: Aren't You Sick of the Unnamed Alligators?
• February 27, 2008: More Crocodile Tears Over "Failures" of Ethics Advocates

Hey Heather Wilson: Return the Vitter Cash

From Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington:
Washington, DC – In light of the National Republican Congressional Committee’s call for candidates and members of Congress to return soon-to-be former Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s (D) donations, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) wonders why members and the National Republican Senatorial Committee have not returned Sen. David Vitter’s (R-LA) contributions. As widely reported, Sen. Vitter has solicited prostitutes in the past. Rather than being condemned and ostracized, Sen. Vitter received a standing ovation at a Republican Caucus luncheon after his transgressions became public.

Government officials must obey all laws, not just those with which they agree. We do not, however, advocate returning legal campaign donations made by officials who broke the law when the contributions are in no way tied to the illegal activity. Nevertheless, we note that what is good for the goose should be good for the gander and, therefore, point out the following contributions made by Sen. Vitter:

2006 Cycle:
National Republican Senatorial Committee – $25,000
House members:
Charles Boustany, Jr. (R-LA) – $1,000
Steve Chabot (R-OH) – $2,500
Jim Gerlach (R–PA) – $2,000
Deborah Pryce (R-OH) – $2,000
Mark Souder (R-IN) – $2,000
Heather Wilson (R-NM) – $2,000

Senate members:
Bob Corker (R-TN) – $10,000
John Ensign (R-NV) – $5,000
Orrin Hatch (R-UT) – $5,000
Jon Kyl (R-AZ) – $6,000

2008 Cycle:

Senate member:
Mitch McConnell (R-KY) – $1,000
***
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) is a non-profit legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions.

For more information, please visit www.citizensforethics.org or contact Naomi Seligman Steiner at 202.408.5565/nseligman@citizensforethics.org.

Eric Griego & Tim Keller at Meetup Last Nite: How We Can Achieve Reforms

District 14 State Senate candidate Eric Griego speaks at DFA-DFNM Meetup

District 17 State Senate candidate Tim Keller addresses the group

In addition to a top-notch presentation on voter demographics and GOTV by Jennifer Ford of America Votes at last night's Albuquerque DFA-DFNM Meetup, the group heard from Eric Griego and Tim Keller. Eric and Tim are both passionate and engaging Dems who are challenging Dem incumbents in State Senate primary races set for June 3, 2008.

Eric Griego on the importance of electing Dems to the Legislature who will support a reform agenda

Both Griego and Keller stressed their strong commitment to needed reforms related to ethics, campaign finance, health care, education and a living wage. They explained how crucial it is for those who advocate change to band together and work hard to replace legislators more interested in protecting the status quo than reforming a broken system. Only grassroots action and determination can elect Democrats who will work on behalf of the people instead of the monied special interests. Whether or not we live in a given candidate's district, we can volunteer, make a small donation and help get the word out to support their campaigns. If they win, we'll all benefit -- not just constituents in their districts.

Griego on how we achieved public financing in Albuquerque and how he'll make ethics and campaign finance reform top priorities in the legislature

It seems clear that until we can get big money from big donors out of the election system, it will remain difficult to enact much-needed legislation on things like universal health care and a true living wage. Strong citizen support won't necessarily translate into the passage of popular measures unless we elect more Democrats who are willing to work hard to first get ethics and campaign finance reform signed into law.

If we consider ourselves to be grassroots activists, we must do more than read the blogs and go to meetings. To get people-powered candidates elected, we have to do our part. Do it now:

Visit the campaign websites of these two candidates to get actively involved in their races:

• Eric Griego, who's running in Senate District 14
• Tim Keller, whos' running in Senate District 17

To see our previous coverage on 2008 New Mexico legislative races, visit our archive. Photos and video by M.E. Broderick. Sorry the video clips aren't of better quality. We need to get a real video camera!

More Crocodile Tears Over "Failures" of Ethics Advocates

As background to this post, see Joe Monahan's latest piece about ethics and campaign reform, where he announces a silly contest. Next, check out what Marjorie at m-pyre has to say about it.

The cowardly Alligators-Afraid-To-Reveal-Their-Names are crying crocodile tears again over the alleged mismanagement of ethics and campaign finance reform by -- get this -- the reformers themselves. The reptilian view is that reform efforts have hit a brick wall because those pushing for change haven't been clear and focused about what they want. This alleged lack of clarity has confused the public so they don't know what to get behind. And it's just plain snookered the poor legislators who have been trying in vain to decipher the priorities of the reformers. Shame on the nonprofit public advocacy organizations that have been using ineffectual tactics and asking for too much at once -- according to the unnamed sources at Monahan.

Let's Have a Contest!
The solution -- who'd a thunk it -- is lurking out there in the mind of some college student in the form of a hip new plan to achieve campaign donation limits. All Joe and his Alligators have to do is bring the ideal plan to the surface by dangling a prize for the winning idea, open their jaws and snap it up.

Too bad Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, AARP and many other organizations that have long been working for change didn't think of that. Why talk to legislators, organize citizen lobbying efforts, urge constituents to contact their reps and vigorously promote the findings of two years of highly respected and publicized work by the Governor's Ethics Task Force -- when they could have just offered up $500 in prize money to entice a college student to come up with a winning advocacy plan!

I think we should try this masterful approach with other legislative efforts that are wildly popular with voters but meet stubborn resistance from the Lobbied Ones. It's not that the Lobbied Ones are bought off by vested special interests or dominated by overly developed greed glands. It's that they're standing by waiting for a clever appeal -- a magic advocacy plan -- to inspire them to do their duty to the people they represent. All this time, powerful legislators have been pining to pass ethics reform legislation -- they've just been waiting to be approached with sufficient pizzazz.

Shaming the Status Quo
Well, there is one problem with the Alligators' blame-the-public-advocate campaign. It has absolutely no credibility in the real world. We can clearly see the forces working the puppet strings at the New Mexico Legislature. We've also noticed how happy the dancing puppets have become with things the way they are. We've seen the light because we've been paying more attention than ever before -- and the light is helping us to follow the money.

The public knows why ethics reforms have had trouble passing. Unquestionably, it's because the foxes (and alligators) guarding the henhouse don't want to change the status quo. They LOVE getting large donations from those with business before the Legislature. They LOVE to use that money to keep competitors from running against them so they can keep on voting against the will of the people. They LOVE having no limits on "campaign contributions" so they can string out an election win into decades of incumbency without merit. They LOVE operating in a state that lacks an ethics commission with the clout needed to root out and punish corruption. They've come to truly LOVE all the cash cows.

Nothing will make certain powerhouses in the Legislature -- and especially in the Senate -- change their minds on ethics reform unless they are absolutely SHAMED into it. They need to be called to account again and again for their refusal to clean up the present system. What we have now is essentially a Legislature where insider networks -- dependent on whats amounts to widespread graft -- operate with impunity to thwart the will of the people. It's a system designed to preserve the perks of incumbency and eliminate any risk of serious challengers emerging with the means to run against anti-reform legislators. The special interests love it. The patronage networks love it. Ordinary people suffer.

Obviously, Monahan and his nameless Alligators have concocted their silly contest to keep the pressure and attention off themselves and put it on those who've been working tirelessly for reform in the face of legislative arrogance. Unable to argue their case with convincing logic, they resort to mockery and farce.

This prime-the-pump system they're defending has worked like a charm for years -- but the people are now wising up and getting active. We've learned too much about how the game works to allow us to sit helpless any longer. We've witnessed the damage first hand when monied special interests call the shots. The destruction is displayed all around us. The crooked games must end.

What Can We Do?
Some of us are lucky enough to have ethical challengers to the status quo running in Dem primaries or the general election against business-as-usual legislators. Even if we don't live in the districts of the challengers, we can lend our time, make small campaign donations and spread the word.

If, like most voters in New Mexico, we live in State House and Senate districts with uncontested races, we can keep contacting our legislators day after day, week after week, month after month about reform. We can make it clear that anyone who keeps fighting ethics and campaign finance reform will be outed repeatedly for their shameful refusals to clean up the cesspool. And we can generously support advocacy organizations like Common Cause that lobby in a non-partisan way on behalf of the citizenry.

As with many issues, only strong public pressure is likely to result in success. We do know what to do. We just have to keep on doing it until we win some victories for the people.

Also see my previous post about the alligator swamp and complaints about ethics reform advocates.

Vote! Clean Elections Amendment on March 4th Santa Fe Ballot

On March 4th, 2008, Santa Fe has a chance to join Albuquerque and many other communities around the nation in voting for clean elections. Albuquerque voters approved the adoption of a voluntary public financing option for all municipal elections in 2005, by a margin of 69-39%. In next week's municipal election in Santa Fe, voters will consider Charter Amendment 4, which proposes a process for establishing public financing in city elections prior to May 2010. Common Cause New Mexico provides an excellent guide on the issue why you should support Amendment 4.

A Santa Fe New Mexican article describes Albuquerque's public financing option and lays out how the Santa Fe amendment would approach the issue:

If Santa Fe voters favor Amendment 4, they will order the City Council to develop a system to establish "meaningful public financing of campaigns" before May 2010, although the amendment doesn't specify the system must be up and running by that time.

... Campaign spending has been on the rise in recent Santa Fe city elections. In 2002, winning incumbent Mayor Larry Delgado raised and spent about $96,000. In the 2006 mayoral election, in which three candidates spent a total of more than $355,000 campaigning for the $25,700-a-year part-time position, winner David Coss led the pack at $146,169.

City councilors last year approved putting the campaign-financing amendment on the ballot on the recommendation of a Charter Review Commission. The commission said such a system would eliminate the potential for corruption inherent in the current situation.

The commission stopped short of suggesting a specific financing system, however, because members realized the charter would be difficult to amend in a way that would allow adjustments. The panel also wanted elected officials, instead of appointed ones, to resolve key issues such as whether the system should involve full funding of campaigns, similar to Albuquerque's system, or partial funding, through matching of private donations. Other issues include how to defray the estimated $100,000 to $200,000 annual public cost of supporting campaigns.

Voting Info: Santa Fe 2008 Municipal Election:
You can vote early in-person on a paper absentee ballot through February 29th at the City Clerk's office on the second floor of City Hall, 102 Lincoln Ave. Office hours are 8 AM to 5 PM, Monday through Friday. If you want to request a mail-in absentee ballot, you must do so before February 29. About 20 polling places will be open March 4 from 7 AM to 7 PM. Click for Election Day polling places or call the City Clerks Office at (505) 955-6521 or (505)955-6520. Voter registration closed earlier this month.

Voters in the Santa Fe municipal election will also elect a City Councilor in four districts and an at-large municipal judge. There are a total of seven Charter Amendments on the ballot. Click for complete information at the Santa Fe City Clerk's website.

The Santa Fe New Mexican online has an election guide to the candidates and some of the Charter Amendments.

Auditor Balderas Meets with Czech Republic Delegation to Discuss Transparency and Ethics in Democracy

Hector Balderas (far right) and Czech delegation. (Click on photo for larger image.)

Yesterday, State Auditor Hector Balderas met in Santa Fe with a distinguished delegation from the Czech Republic to discuss transparency and ethics in democracy. The delegation was invited to tour the United States under the auspices of the Department of State’s International Visitor Leadership Program.

“It is an honor to meet representatives from the Czech Republic to exchange knowledge and ideas about ethics in government,” Balderas stated. “As a burgeoning democracy, the Czech Republic is undergoing numerous challenges in developing systems for accountability and transparency. I hope our dialogue continues for months and years to come, and that I can be a resource in assisting them with government reform.”

The Department of State has outlined the following specific objectives for the project:

• To explore how U.S. federal, state, and district agencies combat corruption;

• To examine the crucial role of NGOs, such as watchdog agencies, in ensuring transparency in politics and public institutions;

• To address issues of judicial ethics and reform; and

• To explore whistleblower protections in the United States.

“As New Mexico’s Auditor, I continue to face challenges in combating government fraud, waste and abuse,” Balderas added. “Resources, innovation, and collaboration are the key to ensuring success in governmental accountability. The public deserves no less.”

The Czech Republic delegation visited New Mexico for two days and consists of high-level prosecutors, law enforcement, and directors of non-governmental organizations.

NM Legislators: Do You Support Clean Elections?

Gotta love it. Clearly New Mexico's Alicia Lueras Maldonado asked a number of New Mexico Legislators about their views on the Clean Elections bill currently being considered at the Roundhouse and posted a video (above) of their responses.

HB564, sponsored by Rep. Gail Chasey, would provide a public financing option for all statewide races in New Mexico similar to a measure enacted previously for Public Regulation Commission candidates and appeals court judges. In fact, Democrat Jason Marks is running for reelection to the PRC this cycle using the public financing option. Unfortunately, HB564 is currently mired in the House Appropriations and Finance Committee. You know why.

Do you know any ordinary citizens who believe it's good policy to preserve the power of large campaign donations from corporate and other vested special interests, along with their corrupting influence on politicos? Unfortunately, those who contribute the big buck cash and those who use it to represent the interests of the donors seem mighty enamored of the present system, which looks more and more like pay-to-play every election cycle.

Common Cause New Mexico has been encouraging constituents to ask their Legislators to sign a Voters First Pledge and promise to work to pass and enforce legislation for full voluntary public campaign financing for statewide offices. After the Session, Common Cause will be issuing their 2008 Ethics Reform Report Card to let voters know the degree to which their legislators support much-needed ethics reform in New Mexico. Should make compelling reading.

You can read our previous coverage on ethics and campaign finance reform at our archive.

(3 Updates) Ethics: Aren't You Sick of the Unnamed Alligators?

"Birdies" told me so.

UPDATE 3: See my later post that follows up on this one and reports on the "campaign limits contest" proposed by some alligator.

UPDATE 2: Be sure to read this post at Clearly New Mexico for more detail on the handling of ethics and campaign finance reform bills at the NM Legislature this year. It tells it like it is. Quote:

The fact of the matter is that Common Cause, the League of Women Voters, AARP and numerous other organizations have been actively pushing Clean Elections, Contribution Limits and an independent Ethics Commission for three years.

... the real question we all should ask and keep asking: Why are some legislative leaders putting the deep freeze on ethics reform - and right before a big election no less?

UPDATE 1: If you want more commentary on the corrupting influence of money, insider cronies and powerful lobbyists at the Roundhouse, be sure to read this piece over at Duke City Fix, this post over at m-pyre and at NM FBIHOP. They're all cookin' with gas.
**********
Too cowardly to speak their piece in public, too many of the most status quo/reactionary legislators, hangers on and lobbyists for elite special interests are content to leak unsourced material by taking on the personnae of the much cited Alligators over at Joe Monahan's place. It's a convenient ploy that can be used to try and gain political advanatage -- whether or not such Alligators really exist in terms of a specific issue. Who's to say where the gossip and spin are really coming from and why? After all, I could put all kinds of statements onto DFNM and claim "birdies" told me so. Who's to argue? There's no proof one way or the other.

The lastest of these stealth attacks clearly aims to convince folks that ethics and campaign finance reforms don''t have a chance in the Legislature AGAIN this year. Even more egregious is the lame excuse being pushed that the ethics package won't pass -- and maybe even shouldn't pass -- because the reformers want too much reform. Ain't that a hoot? Yes, after all the horrendous corruption scandals here and just about everywhere else in the nation due to unrestrained corporate money flowing into the system and everyone looking the other way, we have some nerve demanding that a handful of reforms -- that are supported by the public by a 70-85% margin -- be enacted. If only we'd be more patient. Quote:

Back at the Roundhouse, as our Alligators predicted, major ethics legislation appears dead. Are the ethics lobbyists asking for too much at once? That's a complaint we're hearing. Critics say after years of failure, ethics advocates should push for one big ethics bill a year, not big ethics packages. They argue if you get one piece of the pie each year, after a couple of years you would have a whole pie. Perhaps the donors to Common Cause will think about that in light of yet another unsuccessful session.

No, actually I know that donors to Common Cause and others who have long been fighting to get recalcitrant politicos to face the music and play by some rules will hold LEGISLATORS responsible if this year's ethics package doesn't pass. I know, those who reap the benefits of unfettered campaign "contributions" and don't want anyone looking into ethics allegations with a law with teeth don't want anything passed at all. And if the citizenry gets too loud, they may surrender some tiny piece of turf but never all the pieces that would create a real wall against corruption. "Alligators" are like that.

Another Example of Insider Crapola
If you want more evidence that much of what Monahan and his "Alligators" say is mostly a bunch of hooie, coming directly from the perches of the elite, dig these paragraphs offering a cure for the kinds of caucus/primary problems that are being experienced all over the nation this year:

What the party really needs--to be crass about it--is rich people to serve as chair. Why? Because current Chair Brian Colon says the lack of money was the big reason why the party did not have more voting sites and materials for the election. The party held back spending on those items as well as consultants because he did not have the cash to pay for them.

The chief job of a party chairman is to raise money. Rich people are good at raising money from their rich friends. It's a formula that has been followed for years in both parties.

Yeah, Joe, that's why the nation and the planet are facing the kinds of emergencies on every level that are caused by arrogant hubris and unrestrained power in the hands of "rich people." Of course what Joe leaves out is the fact that much of the money in the state this year went to fund a Quixotic presidential campaign through New Hampshire. You know which one. And, in fact, I don't recall Colon saying anything to that effect anyway. Mostly, he's been taking all the blame for whatever problems happened because he evidently believes that when problems arise, the most important thing is to fix them, not look for scapegoats or seek ways to cover your own behind.

What credibility Monahan has in anything he might say about "what the Party needs" is beyond me, anyway. If you aren't active in the Party, Joe, we really don't care what you have to say about what we need. Frankly -- to be crass about it -- there's no chance in hell that your motives are pure and that you're just dying to give the Party the advice it needs to make it even stronger than it is now. Nobody is naive enough to believe that. And as to this gem:

Paying for a full-time chairman is unlikely to improve fund-raising performance. It is a fact that having a well-established politico with personal money will.

Maybe Joe should do some research before making sweeping generalizations like this. As a matter of fact, modernized, efficient and ethically-run political parties around the country do indeed have paid chairs and even paid fundraisers and other staff. Why? Because the corrosive influence of "rich families" has a tendency to be blunted when professionals take over from good 'ol boys (and sometimes even girls).

A parting thought. According to almost every single rank and file Dem in the Party I've ever talked to -- and contrary to your assertions -- John Wertheim was the one of the worst Party Chairs we've ever had, "wealthy family" or not. (If you're wondering why I'm bringing up Wertheim's name here, go read Monahan's post all the way to the end.)

Wertheim was a chair who wouldn't produce an adequate and transparent financial statement for the Party, refused to consider having the Party's books audited regularly and handed significant money over to at least one "consultant" without even bothering to produce a contract or scope of work to cover the transaction. He antagonized almost every segment of the Party except, of course, the one that appears to be represented in most of the holding forth in Monahan's post today -- monied interests with monied priorities who want to conduct business in secret and the public be damned.

Tonight on NM In Focus: Ethics Reform

KNME-TV Channel 5's New Mexico In Focus, which airs tonight at 7:00 PM, will feature a discussion about ethics reform with Common Cause New Mexico's Executive Director Steven Robert Allen, State Rep. and Minority Whip Dan Foley and former Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron. The recommendations made by Gov. Bill Richardson's Ethics Reform Task Force have not gotten much traction at the Roundhouse this Session despite Richardson ranking them among his top priorities. Learn the ins and outs of the proposed bills and what the chances are for passage. Read more about tonight's show and who's on The Line segment's panel.

New Mexico In Focus repeats on KNME-TV at 6:30 AM on Sundays. You can also watch videos of the programs on the show's web page that are uploaded a day or so after each show.

Ask Your Legislators to Sign the Voters First Pledge

As you probably know by now, many of our New Mexico legislators haven't exactly rushed to jump on the clean elections bandwagon. Like last year, there's an abundance of foot dragging and a pile of excuses on the part of lawmakers in Santa Fe regarding expanding voluntary public campaign financing beyond appellate judge and PRC contests.

I guess too many of our state reps and senators like the thrill of collecting big sums of money from the vested special interests that bring their business onto the House and Senate floors for passage. What fun would it be to serve the people's interests and have to forego all those cash advances for legislation to please the donors? I know that a great many of our lawmakers are honest, but it's time to make it easier for good candidates to run against the bad eggs who are beholden to all the wrong people for all the wrong reasons.

Common Cause New Mexico has come up with way to try and prod the lawmakers who are supposed to represent us into taking a public stand on public financing. By clicking here you can ask your state legislators to take the (pdf). It asks them to pledge to put voters first and work to pass and enforce legislation for full voluntary public campaign financing for statewide offices, extending the legislation already in place for New Mexico appellate court judge races and the Public Regulation Commission.

Shortly after the legislative session, Common Cause New Mexico will release a 2008 Ethics Reform Report Card to let voters know the degree to which their legislators support much-needed ethics reform in New Mexico. The Report Card will be partially based on their Voters First Pledge. Now's the time to hold them accountable. Ask your legislators to take the Voters First Pledge.