AG Patricia Madrid Gets Second Chance

When Patricia Madrid was asked to investigate and prosecute the State Treasurer scandal, she wouldn't. As a result, the extortion practices of the State Treasurer's office were left unchecked until the feds stepped in to finally put a damper on the decade of corruption that has plagued state government.

Now, Attorney General Madrid has a rare second chance. Something stinks about the Art Trujillo connection to Angelo Garcia. The MSM newsmedia doesn't want to touch it; however, Duke City Fix does a great job of digging up the old $3 million scandal that plagued Mayor Chavez's buddy, Art Trujillo. By the looks of it, this could be as big a deal, maybe bigger, than the extortion practices that were uncovered at the State Treasurer office.

The first step would be to subpoena the Chavez campaign to turn over the list of attendees at the Angelo Garcia fundraiser. Mayor Chavez claims he is returning the money [or at least some of it] from Garcia associates "to avoid the appearance of impropriety." Well, it is too late for that, and the campaign's unwillingness to turnover the list of attendees adds fuel to the fire of that they are hiding something. Why am I not surprised that they don't feel they are obligated to full public disclosure of campaign funds?

The next step would be to see how many of those attendees have ties to Vigil, Montoya and Bernalillo County Commissioners serving during Trujillo's 1989 landswap. Remember, we're talking about a land deal, and Angelo Garcia is currently under indictment for swindling the elderly in a land development scandal. Too convenient of a coincidence if you ask me.

How about it Patricia Madrid? Are you finally going to step up and do what we have been paying you to do all these years? Or are you going to let politics get in the way of doing your job?

Believable or NOT

The video clips are out on Mayor Chavez's decision to return the money raised when his buddy Art Trujillo held a fundraiser at the home of Angelo Garcia, confessed extortionist and indicted swindler of the elderly. Take a look at the video clips from KRQE and KOAT.

I can't find the video from KKOB, the station that broke the original story, but it is interesting to note that Mayor Chavez's first response, despite a substantial war chest, did not include a decision to return the money. Make no mistake, this is not because he was caught off guard by reporter Neil Simon. The mayor's campaign was contacted about the story at least a full 24 hours before it broke and had plenty of time to decide to do the right thing. Heck, even I heard about the fundraiser last Thursday night while hanging out at the New West Launch Party at the Press Club. Unfortunately, I was unable to get someone not tied to the mayor's opponents to provide on the record corroboration. Yet on Monday night, when the mayor went on the air, he still wasn't ready to give up the ill-gotten funds.

Worse yet, the mayor proceeded to insult our intelligence. Reading this summary, you can't help but be struck by the following quote:

"Certainly, if we had some of his money, knowing what we all now know about him, I'd give it back in a heartbeat," said Chavez. "But I have no money from him or from any of his associates to my knowledge."

Get real! Marty Chavez has a law degree from Georgetown University, and he expects us to believe that he doesn't understand that people who attend a fundraiser at someone's house are "associates." How about the $2,000 received from Art Trujillo? Since Trujillo has received over $20,000 from Angelo Garcia, doesn't he count as an associate?

Can't you just picture the scene that must have occurred at Mayor Chavez's campaign headquarters. The high paid consultants explain to the mayor that he must return the money, and Marty, in Napoleonic fashion stomps his feet and whines, "But it's my money. They gave it to me. I don't want to give it back. You always make me give it back."

Eventually - once they explain to him that it means more television coverage - he sees the promise of camera lights and agrees. The result is a mediocre encore performance:

Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez's re-election campaign is returning approximately $3,000 dollars raised during a fundraiser hosted by a man indicted in the treasurer's office scandal.

A campaign spokesperson [and the Mayor in the KRQE interview] says the money is being returned in order to avoid the appearance of impropriety.

The mayor was even less believable than when he tried to plead innocent after being caught using the ABQPAC as an ATM.

Wake up Mainstream Media!

The Journal has endorsed Mayor Chavez (subscription) without any mention of his scandalous past. Now they seem to be avoiding the scandalous present. The Tribune reports on the Mayor's link to the criminal underworld with kid gloves allowing statements that raise more questions then they answer to go unchallenged:

"The event [fundraiser at Angelo Garcia's house for Marty Chavez] raised about $3,000, though Garcia himself is not a contributor to the campaign," Griffin said.

"We wouldn't be any part of that fund-raiser if we had any knowledge of him today," Griffin said. "But back on Aug. 15, no one other than the people working on the case in Santa Fe with the sealed records knew about his illegal business dealings."

I can't believe they reported that statement without any investigative reporting to follow it up. This is what should have followed next:

Art Trujillo, co-host of the event and recipient of more than $20,000 in campaign funds from Angelo Garcia, could not be reached for comment.

A quick search of campaign contributions on followthemoney.org reveals that the individual payout by Angelo Garcia of $14,600 to Art Trujillo is the largest single contribution by any individual to any Commissioner of Public Lands candidate since 1992. Throw in the $5,500 additional payout by Angelo Garcia's company, American Financial Group, and the amount raises some serious questions especially in light of the indictments against Angelo Garcia.

Mr. Garcia has only supported two candidates and the other one, who received less then Mr. Trujillo, has been indicted on extortion charges.

You see, if that had been reported, then the public would be demanding to know more about Mayor Marty Chavez's long affiliation with Art Trujillo and his crooked friends. People should be judged by the company the keep.

The rest of the "news" outlets, which have failed to cover this story, could still get a scoop. I just laid it out for you. How about reporting it?

Chavez has Strong Links to Corruption

If you were watching the news on KOB-TV tonight, you saw the confirmation of a link between Mayor Chavez and indicted swindler and confessed racketeer, Angelo Garcia. The mayor admittedly spent an hour at Garcia's house on August 15 to raise money for his already flush campaign.

Now Mayor Chavez is trying to feign complete ignorance. Unfortunately for him, it doesn't ring true. After all, who arranged the event? The mayor's longtime pal, Art Trujillo. You know, the guy who has received more dirty campaign money from Angelo Garcia than even Robert Vigil. The same Art Trujillo that the Mayor helped out with his extorted ABQPAC funds.

Mayor Marty Chavez has a serious problem. He is ethically deficient He repeatedly engages in behavior that is embarrassing for the City of Albuquerque and the State of New Mexico. If he is re-elected, voters will be sending a loud message to politicians that corruption is okay. Putting Marty Chavez back in office is like giving the car keys to someone with multiple DWI's... New Mexico citizens are bound to be hurt.

Stop the Deception Debate

On October 4, 2005, some Albuquerque voters may be hoodwinked into believing they are voting on whether or not to inflate the local minimum wage. Significant controversy has been sparked by the deceptive practices of the ordinance's promoters, and their discrimination against the disabled. The issue will be the subject of a discussion hosted by the Anderson Schools of Management at the University of New Mexico.

WHAT: Anderson Issues Forum: Albuquerque Minimum Wage Debate

WHO: Martin Heinrich, Albuquerque City Councilor
Melissa Binder, UNM Economics Professor
Allen Parkman, UNM Business Professor
Jerry Easley, Chairman, Albuquerque Employment Growth Initiative

WHEN: Tuesday, September 27, 7:30-9:30 pm

WHERE: UNM Continuing Education Auditorium
1634 University Blvd. NE

ADMISSION: Free and open to the public

Governor Richardson's Financial Scandals

In 2002, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was passed by Congress to hold corporate executives and their Boards responsible for the financial information that is reported. This law was a measure to address the devastating corporate scandals of the time that resulted as a lack of proper oversight. As you may recall, one of those scandals involved our very own Governor Bill Richardson:

The story is all too familiar. Several months ago, before WorldCom and in the wake of Enron and Global Crossing, Peregrine Systems, Inc., a lesser-known San Diego-based software company, announced it had overstated its earnings by $100 million, while "independent" accounting firm Arthur Andersen was overseeing the books. Another corporation, another lie, and another investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Justice Department.

As these scandals have unraveled, the term "independent" is bearing more
scrutiny. How "independent" are auditors? How "independent" are "outside"
board members?

Consider the Peregrine imbroglio and one of its "outside" board members, New Mexico's Democratic gubernatorial candidate Bill Richardson. Upon the announcement of Peregrine's misdeeds last May, Bill Clinton's former energy secretary requested, through a letter to the company, an investigation into the accounting improprieties - a wise political tact and the obvious first move in beginning to distance himself from a company that would soon implode. Mr. Richardson, declaring publicly his concern as an "independent" board member, seemed to clear himself of any Peregrine taint. His letter was covered in New Mexico's newspapers, and he stated outright, "I had no involvement because I was what was called an outside director." Mr. Richardson resigned from the board in June. [read the full text]

This is not something that happened in the Governor's distant past. Quite to the contrary, it is a case of financial fraud that occurred during the Governor's watch just over three years ago. So the question is... did he learn from it? The short answer, sure.

Notice that the "wise political tact" of requesting an investigation after, but not before, the fraud became news was repeated recently in response to the State Treasurer scandal. He also learned that claiming "no involvement" seemed to appease the voters. Just check out this excerpt [subscription] from the Journal:

Treasurer's Office investments are subject to the advice and consent of the state Board of Finance, which Richardson chairs and controls. The board also sets investment policy for the treasurer.

Richardson spokesman Pahl Shipley said the governor played no role [emphasis added] in the Treasurer's Office investment business with Wachovia Securities.

Uh oh, now we have a problem. The Governor is the Chairman of the Board, and if we take Mr. Shipley at his word, then the Governor did not fulfill his duties to the citizens of New Mexico. If this were a publicly traded company, I believe under Sarbanes-Oxley Governor Richardson would be facing the prospect of some jail time.

Based on all of this, I'm of the same mind as Mr. Chavez.

What's Your Vigil Number?

There is a fun little tool called the Oracle of Bacon from the University of Virginia that measures how many degrees separate a particular actor from Kevin Bacon. (Full disclosure: my Bacon number is 3.) In light of yesterday's post, I started to wonder about the Vigil number for some of our more notable actors on the political scene.

Let me set the stage with a recap of current events.

An Albuquerque businessman and two associates were indicted [September 1, 2005] on multiple counts of securities fraud and related charges, according to the New Mexico Securities Division.

The indictments allege that Angelo Garcia, 57, defrauded several victims of a total of more than $900,000 between October 2000 and January 2005. The victims, all senior citizens, lost from $65,000 to $275,000 each, according to Patrick McNertney, assistant director of enforcement for the Securities Division.

We're not talking about very nice men, and you don't have to take my word for it:

Attorney General Patricia Madrid said, "This case is particularly egregious because the defendants were specifically targeting senior citizens. All of the victims were older than 75, with the oldest being 97. With these three indictments, we are reinforcing our commitment to prosecute financial fraud and to protect the elderly in New Mexico."

Unfortunately, what she forgets to mention is that this was allowed to happen because she didn't do her job back in the fall of 2001 when Governor Gary Johnson asked her to investigate and prosecute the illegal activity of the State Treasurer. As those who have read the affidavit know, if Patricia Madrid had done her job, Angelo and Joseph Garcia would have been in jail instead of preying on the elderly. Attorney General Patricia Madrid your Vigil number is 1.

How about Governor Bill Richardson? He seems to be taking this very seriously:

Richardson said the state will conduct "a top to bottom review of all investment practices and a review of all investment contracts and has directed state agencies to conduct an internal assessment of all investment activities at all levels of state government."

Where have I read something very similar to this before?

I [Bill Richardson] believe government must be managed in a fiscally responsible manner, and that every government program, indeed, every government employee, must be held accountable to you the taxpayers. My administration will continue to challenge and question the way we do business to make sure every tax dollar is spent wisely. That's why I initiated a Performance Review to look at state services and operations in order to save money and improve services.

Only our Governor could get away with proposing the exact same solution that previously failed to turn up the fraud. Heck, he has a cabinet secretary that stated back in 2002 that illegal activity was occurring at the State Treasurer's office. Just read this (slightly reformatted) excerpt found on Julia Goldberg's blog:

Q: Three days after 9.11, State Treasurer Michael Montoya made a controversial play with state funds. How much money was involved and what did he do? Do you support that move?

A: He put $400 million from the overnight repurchase agreement into a mutual fund. No. That was an illegal investment. He used a broker, which was unnecessary, and the broker wasn't under contract with the state. When you're dealing with state money, legality, safety, liquidity, and return are all to be considered, in that order. That did not happen.

Kind of makes you wonder why Governor Richardson didn't find it a priority to protect New Mexicans from the corruption that was obviously plaguing the State Treasurer's office at the time he was elected to office. The audits do land on his desk, don't they? Governor Bill Richardson your Vigil number is a 2.

Now both of the previously mentioned elected officials are guilty of not acting. This next official is much worse. First, a little more narration from that Security Divisions news release:

The indictment alleges that the Garcia brothers and Montoya promised victims they would earn from 7 to 10 percent interest annually investing in a "low income housing development" to be built in Santa Fe. The project was never built and the promissory notes issued to the victims were never repaid. Through his companies American Financial Group and MAV Investments, Garcia targeted senior citizens through newspaper ads and mailings.

I draw your attention to the name of Garcia's company, American Financial Group. A quick search at followthemoney.org reveals that contributions by Garcia's company have only been reported by two elected state officials... Indicted State Treasurer Robert Vigil $4,400 and former Land Commissioner Art Trujillo $5,500. Also worth noting, Angelo Garcia personally gave them $10,965 and $14,600 respectively. Now that raises some questions. Art Trujillo actually got more money then Robert Vigil. But wait, this gets even more interesting...

Art Trujillo has only reported giving money at the state level to four individuals: Ernesto Chavez ($20 in 1994 - House), Phil Griego ($100 in 2004 - Senate), Martin Chavez ($65 in 1992 - Senate) and Michael Montoya ($125 in 2000 - Treasurer).

We know that Montoya is under indictment for federal racketeering, so let's focus on Mayor Marty Chavez. I realize that folks like Tim might say that I'm making much ado about nothing. After all, it's $65 more than twelve years ago. But consider this:

Chavez also said he might have asked the [ABQ]PAC to give money to Art Trujillo, an unsuccessful candidate for state land commissioner.

Well, if he didn't say it, they read his mind because they gave $1,000 to Trujillo from the Mayor's extorted slush fund. Yup, just like American Financial Group gave its illicit funds to Trujillo. Of course, the Mayor has been paid back generously with $2,000 showing on campaign filings to date from Art Trujillo. Mayor Chavez your Vigil number is 3.

Too Little Too Late and Silent Collaborators

I'm confused. I know, what else is new?

Attorney General Patricia Madrid called Tuesday for state Treasurer Robert Vigil to resign because of pending federal racketeering charges against him, and she threatened to go to court to remove him from office if he didn't step down.

Madrid, a Democrat, is the first state public officer to call for Vigil’s resignation.

What's confusing about that? It seems pretty straight forward, right? Well, it does until you start reading through that 30 page affadavit (hat tip: Joe Monahan):

CW2 has plead guilty to a violation of Title 18 United States Code 1951, commonly referred to as the Hobbs Act. On September 1 CW2 was indicted on securities fraud by the State of New Mexico Attorney General's Office [p. 5 lines 23-26].

Since that's the case, what has taken AG Madrid so long to call for a resignation? And I'm not just talking about the 20 days between that previous conviction and her recent "I'm tough on corrupt politiicans" stance. Check out the comments by Rudy Sanchez and Eli Chavez at the bottom of this article. Six years of negligence is an awfully long time for an official whose website states:

As New Mexico’s Chief Law Enforcement Officer, the protection of New Mexicans is a priority of Attorney General Madrid’s administration. The Office of the Attorney General has two divisions that investigate and prosecute criminal activity in our state.

Oops, seems like someone forgot to investigate and prosecute. So, what's worse than an Attorney General whose failed to do her job?

Vigil took $1,900 in cash and began to instruct CW3 as to where portions of the remaining $3000 of his money should be paid. Specifically Vigil state that he donates to numerous campaigns throughout New Mexico in exchange for their help in his campaign. Vigil instructed CW# that he would call CW3 with the requests for donations and that CW3 would write the appropriate check and send it to Vigil. Vigil advised that he had already promised $1,000 to one campaign. [p. 18 lines 22-27].

That's right. The implication is there are a whole lot of other publicly elected officials involved in the money laundering and extortion scheme. A search of FollowThe Money.org turns up some interesting beneficiaries from 2004 [why can't our Secretary of State provide a tool like this?]:

ANDERS, JOANN B			$50
BALDERAS, HECTOR H			$50
CAMPOS II, JOSE A			$50
CHAVEZ, EDWARD L			$25
DIAMOND, JEFFREY B			$50
GARCIA, MIGUEL P			$50
GRUBESIC, JOHN T L			$50
HOOKER, JOHN			$50
IRWIN, DONA G			$50
LOPEZ, LINDA M			$50
LUNDSTROM, PATRICIA (PATTY) A			$50
ORTIZ Y PINO, GERALD P			$50
PARK, AL			$50
PONCE, PAULINE J			$50
SANCHEZ, MICHAEL S			$50
SWISSTACK, THOMAS E			$50
WIRTH, PETER F			$50

BERKHEIMER, CHRIS			$50
CAMPOS, PETE			$100
CORDOVA, KANDY			$50
DUBOIS, STEPHANIE L			$25
GARCIA, MARY JANE M			$50
GRIEGO, PHIL			$50
ROBINSON, SHANNON			$50
TAYLOR, JAMES G (SD014)			$50

ARAGON, MANNY M		$100
BEGAY, RAY		$50
BHASKER, RAVI		$50
DUBOIS, STEPHANIE L		$50
FROST, ROBERT L		$50
KANDO, JANICE		$50
LUJAN, ANTONIO		$50
NUNEZ, ANDREW (ANDY)		$50
ONEILL, WILLIAM BALDWIN		$50
RUIZ, HARRIET I		$50
SANDERS, GASTON O		$50
SILVA, DANIEL P		$50

Wow! What a list? Now, I know $50 is not a lot of money, but I don't remember hearing any of these folks say "Oh my, I may have taken extortion money."

Problems All Around

I'm heading over to the New Mexico Business Weekly Face-Off event this morning, so I'm pushed for time. However, below are some links you should follow. It seems that when it comes to politics, New Mexico is on it's way to becoming the Land of Disenchantment...

• Progressive Democrats have had it with corruption among their ranks.
• Conservative Republicans are sick of the "ocean front property" for everyone mentality.

I wonder if the similarities between ABQPAC scandal and the State Auditors' extortion practices will be brought up at this morning's forum.

UPDATE: Mayor Chavez was unable to make it to the candidate forum this morning, and had Fred Mondragon attend in his place. ABQPAC scandal similarities to the recent extortion charges did come up (ok, I confess, I submitted the question).

Mr. Mondragon's response, I'm paraphrasing, was that the ABQPAC scandal was old news, and he didn't understand why people kept bringing it up. Hmm, maybe because the character of a politician is never old news.

He went on to imply that it was very different than the current situation since people freely gave the money. Okay then, I'm glad we cleared that up.

Mr. Steele was not present, but both City Councilors were. I stick to my analysis of the candidates from the televised debate.

Support Group Forming

Indicted on federal racketeering charges on Friday, State Auditor Robert Vigil indicated to reporters he will be back at his desk today. Apparently, there is still money to be made.

It can't be long before a support group for elected officials with indictments is formed.

Another Bad Ballot Referendum

I've written a couple of times on what a terrible idea it is for us to have taxpayer funded elections. Of course, the folks over at Common Cause disagree with me:

On June 30, the Albuquerque City Council voted 5-2 to send the Open and Ethical Elections Code referendum to the October 4 citywide ballot. The referendum will give Albuquerque voters a chance to determine whether we should have voluntary limits on campaign spending and publicly financed elections [emphasis added].

Now that part with the emphasis added is very important. The proposed referendum will do nothing to cap the amount of money a given candidate can raise. That has already been ruled unconstitutional in a rare moment of clarity by Tenth Circuit of Appeals. So, let's examine this year's election and see what the cost could have been to taxpayers.

We have the mayoral incumbent who will come close to raising $1 million - interestingly enough in his Albuquerque Journal profile (subscription) he indicated he "supports removing big dollars from campaigns," just another example of that flexible value system. Since he raised this much, each of the other candidates, if they opted into the taxpayer funded scheme, would qualify for up to $560,000, double the number of registered voters (subscription). Plus, in the case of a run-off an additional $92,400 would be available to the candidate. So, just for the mayoral race the burden to taxpayers in this race could have reached $1.7 MILLION.

Oh, and this doesn't even factor in the council races which are also entitled to significant amounts. Now, before someone shoots me off an email that says that the fund would have been limited to $447,000 this year, let's consider that. If a mayoral incumbent still has the option of raising $1 million, how does that level the playing field for the taxpayer funded candidates who have to share $447,000 amongst themselves and all City Council candidates. The short answer... it doesn't.

Morale of this story: "If it doesn't help, don't pass it." But the tale doesn't end here, let's take a look at the second misguided premise put forth by Common Cause:

Albuquerque Clean Elections believes the Open and Ethical Elections Code will level the playing field and give people from many different backgrounds a fair shot at getting elected without owing anyone any special favors. The system will allow candidates to spend less time raising money and more time talking to voters about the issues.

This is a two-parter. First question to come to mind is what exactly is being implied by "give people from many different backgrounds a fair shot?" Are people from diverse backgrounds being excluded? Again, let's look at the current slate of mayoral candidates.

Eric Griego, one of four children raised by a mother earning minimum wage, is a Hispanic single dad from Barelas. Brad Winter, an Eagle Scout with a long career in education, is a Caucasian father in a blended family with seven kids. Martin Chavez, a lawyer from a political family, is a Hispanic divorcee with a dog. David Steele, a retired government employee, is a Caucasian grandfather just three years shy of celebrating his golden anniversary.

Sure looks like a diverse group of candidates to me. I know, there isn't a woman. However, that is only because Common Cause candidate sued to have her removed. Bottomline: the current slate proves that people from many different backgrounds already have a fair shot.

Part two, "the system will allow candidates to spend less time raising money." Oh, really (subscription)?

Mayoral candidates who sign up to get money from the program would have to demonstrate a base of support by getting donations of $5 apiece from 1 percent of the city's registered voters, or about 2,800 people.

You don't think the number of phone calls it would take to get 2,800 people to give you $5 is going to take a lot of time. Maybe they think it can all be done through mail? Well, direct mail gets at best a 1-2% return rate. So, hoping for the best means the cost in postage alone would be a minimum of $29,400 for one mailing. Now, add in production costs. Only a government funded system would require more than $30,000 in expenditures to raise $14,000.

This referendum needs to be defeated on Oct. 4. Email this post to your friends and colleagues, and ask them to email it to theirs.

Mayoral Choices

As I was watching last night's mayoral debate on television, I was struck by the fact that there are very clear choices for the voters to make.

If you are an anti-growth, union pushing, bigger government voter then Eric Griego is your man.

If you want someone to tackle education, reduce crime and do it in a fiscally responsible (subscription) manner then Brad Winter is your man.

If you think confiscating private property (subscription), spending like there is no tomorrow (subscription), and being able to overlook ethics for personal gain is the stuff of great mayors then Marty Chavez is your man.

If you really don't think it matters who is mayor then cast your vote for David Steele.

ACORN Offends Disability Advocates

ACORN's bias against the disabled has drawn the ire of one advocacy group.

Note to Politicians: Let the Market Work

Someone needs to sit our politicians down and review the basics of economics in a capitalist democracy. We do not need new fuel economy standards, nor do we need price gouging laws. You see, there is this thing called supply and demand. When supply is limited and demand is great, prices are supposed to go up. If people feel they are being abused, then they will seek alternatives and the opportunistic companies that only look at the short term gain will go out of business.

Think about it, the corner gas station that charges an obscene price may get away with it during a crisis, but people don't forget that behavior.

What is going on with gas prices is no different than what goes on at ballparks, movie theaters and countless other venues across America. Buy a hot dog and a drink at a sporting event and it is going to cost you significantly more than the same fare anywhere else. Are you being gouged? No, you're being charged what you are willing to pay. If they charge too much, what happens? You start eating before you go to the game, or you stop going to the game altogether.

If you are a "progressive" or "green" complaining about gas prices, you're barking up the wrong tree. Instead of whining, you should hope that gas prices top $100 dollars a gallon. When this happens, people start considering the market alternatives, and clean energy solutions don't look so cost prohibitive. For those slow-down-the-growth folks, nothing halts rapid expansion like increasing costs. So, what the heck are you complaining about?

Don't even think about telling me that gas, or milk, or eggs or electricity is a "need." They are not. They are "wants," and there is nothing wrong with a business charging people for things that they want. If you don't want to pay high prices for gas, try biking or walking.

Governor Loses Grip on Reality

Despite the rosy outlook the administration continuously attempts to spin for the national media, it appears that watching initiative after initiative miserably fail has finally begun to take its toll on Governor Richardson:

"Our schools are getting better," Richardson said. "But it's not good enough."

Oh no, he didn't actually call a press conference to say that. Didn't anyone on the very large gubernatorial staff call him when he was gallivanting around the world to bring him up to speed on New Mexico's recent educational performance.

Last year roughly one third of New Mexico's schools failed to make adequate yearly progress. This year the number of failing schools jumped to half of the schools in the state (subscription). I'm afraid that this latest attempt at spin indicates that Governor Richardson has completely lost touch with reality.

A Simple Question

ACORN is pushing for a "living wage" of $7.50 an hour in the city of Albuquerque. However, a quick Google search seems to indicate that ACORN is at war with Wal-Mart. Yet, it doesn't make any sense when you consider this:

Carl Jones, one of the leaders of the new group, said Wal-Mart's pay was too low, pointing to the $9.40 an hour he earns after five years as the lead shopping cart pusher at a Wal-Mart in Apopka, outside Orlando.

"It's really hard for me and my wife to make ends meet," Mr. Jones said. "They treat workers like we're just something there to be used and to get as much out of us as they can."

Wal-Mart is paying this guy $9.40 for pushing carts, and he is complaining. Apparently, $9.40 is not a livable wage even though it is $1.90 per hour higher than what is being proposed in Albuquerque.

In fact, enemies of Wal-Mart are quick to debunk the CEO's claims that the average wage is $10 an hour:

As Tom Geoghegan, a labor lawyer in Washington (and author of Which Side Are You On?: Trying To Be For Labor When It's Flat On Its Back) points out, the relevant number isn't the average, which would be skewed upward by the large salaries of relatively few highly-paid company executives - Scott, for example, receives, by one reckoning, 897 times the pay of the average Wal-Mart worker - but the median. In the Dec. 16 New York Review of Books, Simon Head, director of the Project on Technology and the Workplace at the Century Foundation, stated, "the average pay of a sales clerk [italics mine] at Wal-Mart was $8.50 an hour, or about $14,000 a year, $1,000 below the government's definition of the poverty level for a family of three."

That's right. The average pay of a sales clerk at Walmart is $8.50 an hour. A full one dollar higher than the so-called living wage law being proposed in Albuquerque. This brings us to my simple question. Why isn't ACORN putting Walmart on a pedestal as a shining example of corporate citizenry?

Maybe it is because the living wage push has nothing to do with the needs of workers and everything to do with trying to revitalize declining union membership.

Learn What it Means to be a Leader

Ok, enough already!

Reading this and this just makes my blood boil. The left is complaining that Republicans miserably failed the people of New Orleans, and that FEMA is too slow in taking action, and a litany of other complaints.

However, Bernalillo County Sheriff Darren White reminds us what it means to be a leader. He should not be berated, he should be applauded. He did not just send a group of 35 New Mexicans made up of law enforcement officers and firefighters into an area with armed gunmen, toxic waters and decaying corpses. Sheriff White led them.

It is so rare we see courage and true leadership among the elected officials in this state that we don't know what it looks like when it happens. We need more Sheriff Whites. No one wants to talk about it, but dozens of police officers in New Orleans turned in their badges rather than do what Darren White and dozens of other brave New Mexicans are doing.

Think about it.

During 9/11 we were reminded of the hero that is behind every badge. Members of the NYPD and NYFD ran into collapsing buildings to save the lives of people like you and me, and in so doing gave up their own. There are many heros like that in New Orleans, and they did not turn in their badges. They are on the street night and day trying to bring law and order back to a ravaged area, and saving peoples lives. They are also being reinforced by folks like the team from New Mexico who are there for no other reason than they share a sense of duty.

If politics was the motivating factor, Sheriff White could have more easily kept his face in the public eye as a talking head making evening news commentary on what others are doing right and wrong. Instead, he left his family and the comfort of his home to roll up his sleeves and lead by doing. My thanks goes out to Darren White and all of those with him, and so should yours. Feel free to leave a thank you in the comments section. In fact, ask your friends to write a note of thanks.

Think, Think, What's Different?

Problems in the City Different:

Santa Fe city councilors are bracing for layoffs , cutbacks and amended labor negotiations in the face of two straight months of declining gross-receipts-tax revenues.

Councilors on the Finance Committee on Tuesday were dumbfounded by the news - especially because lodgers-tax revenues, reflecting tourism, are climbing.

What could the problem be?

The overall state gross-receipts-tax rate increased Jan. 1 [emphasis added] so that, in theory, the new deductions would not make any difference in the overall revenues. State officials said the March dip was caused by businesses hesitating to pay the tax while they figured out how to separate food sales from sales of taxable items.

For several months, it appeared Santa Fe's revenues would recover. City tax revenues were up .2 percent in April, 4.8 percent in May and 10.3 percent in June. This summer , however, while Santa Fe's gross-receipts-tax revenues began dropping, other New Mexico cities saw increases.

Ok, two important lessons here. First, everyone needs to stop calling Richardson a tax cutting Governor. He raised the anti-business gross receipts tax and state revenue went up,up, up - except for in Santa Fe. What's different about Santa Fe than every other city in New Mexico?

Oh yeah, I remember! They are the only city to pass an inflated minimum wage ordinance. Take heed Albuquerque.

ACORN Shafts the Disabled

I just finished reading the full Living Wage Ordinance (pdf) that is supposed to appear on the October 4th Albuquerque City election ballot. I say "supposed to appear," because in flagrant disregard to the Albuquerque City Charter (Article III, Section 3b), voters will only find this misleading summary instead of the full ten-page text:

PROPOSING TO ENACT A LIVING WAGE ORDINANCE THAT ESTABLISHES A MINIMUM WAGE IN THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE OF $7.50 PER HOUR FOR REGULAR EMPLOYEES AND $4.50 PER HOUR FOR TIPPED EMPLOYEES. THE ORDINANCE WILL NOT COVER SMALL BUSINESSES WITH TEN OR FEWER EMPLOYEES, WORK-STUDY STUDENTS, INTERNS WORKING FOR ACADEMIC CREDIT, OR CERTAIN OTHER EMPLOYEES WHO ARE EXEMPT FROM THE NEW MEXICO MINIMUM WAGE LAW. EACH YEAR IN THE FUTURE THE MINIMUM WAGE RATES WILL BE INCREASED TO KEEP PACE WITH INFLATION. THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES FOR ENFORCEMENT, INCLUDING DOUBLE DAMAGES FOR UNPAID WAGES, AND FORBIDS RETALIATION AGAINST EMPLOYEES FOR EXERCISING THEIR RIGHTS.

So, what are the backers of this measure trying to hide. Well, for starters there is the automatic exclusion of the handicapped from earning the proposed higher minimum wage.

I kid you not.

On page 4 Line 17-18 of the ordinance, it says, "'Employee' shall not include any person who is a handicapped individual...." Can you believe it? ACORN actually went out of their way to relegate all handicapped workers to second class citizen status. This flies in the face of the Fair Labor Standards Act which makes it very clear that just because someone is disabled does not mean they should earn less than the prevailing minimum wage:

Section 14(c) does not apply unless the disability actually impairs the worker's earning or productive capacity for the work being performed. The fact that a worker may have a disability is not in and of itself sufficient to warrant the payment of a special minimum wage.

Of course, I guess this type of offensive legislative language should be expected from an organization that pushes for higher minimum wages yet has a history of fighting to keep from paying its own employees (subscription) the minimum wage when it was only $4.25 an hour. Oh, I know. According to an ACORN representative this is old news:

[Jen Kern of the ACORN Living Wage Resource Center in Boston] said the case "comes up constantly."

"At the time of this suit, a lawyer on our payroll thought the peculiarities of California labor law could prevent dedicated field organizers from volunteering time outside of work hours," she said.

"In the process of pursuing the suit, he made some arguments that we certainly don't stand by ... and that we put an end to as soon as we became aware."

Hmm, how long did it take them to become aware of it? Apparently long enough to not only lose the original court case, but to also lose the appeal. That's a pretty long time to be conveniently unaware. Based on recent history here in Albuquerque there must be a whole segment in the ACORN employee manual that provides direction on how to conduct operations in a state of blissful inattentiveness.

Katrina Disaster: A Realistic Assessment

I live on a mountain side about 200 yards or so from the edge of a National Forest. The forest is seriously overgrown and there are constant warnings regarding fire danger. It is more than likely that one of these years a lightening strike is going to occur that will result in a forest fire that could burn down my home and homes and businesses throughout my community. We are all aware of this, and yet we still choose to live and work here. Sound familiar? So, who would be to blame if a fire occurred?

I realize that the scale of any natural disaster that could occur in the East Mountains pales in comparison to what Katrina has wrought. In fact, the scale of any disaster to occur on US soil to date will in all likelihood pale by comparison.

I also think what has happened to the people of New Orleans, Biloxi and other communities in the region is a terrible tragedy and my heart and prayers truly goes out to them. My family has already joined countless others in making a contribution to relief efforts, and I am sure we, citizens throughout the country, will do more in the weeks and months to come. This is and has always been the American Way.

Unfortunately, it is also the American Way to politicize disaster. The outcry from the left that this disaster is the result of racial prejudice is obscene. In 1900, Galveston was decimated by a hurricane that left more than 8,000 people dead. This happened in a community where "Only the nation's wealthiest were allowed to live..." Yes, that was over a century ago, but read the description of the disaster and you will see that history eerily repeats itself - especially the parts about the populace not heeding early warnings and the failure of local and state government to prepare.

This last point is important. If any governmental entity deserves blame, it is on the state and local level, not on the federal level. The city and the state authorities failed the people of New Orleans. The lack of leadership shown by elected city and state officials in dealing with this projected crisis is the direct opposite of what we saw by state and municipal leaders following 9/11.

Governor Continues Taxpayer Gouging

In an ironic twist...

Gov. Bill Richardson and New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid said Friday they will work to draft legislation to investigate and punish companies that engage in gas price gouging after natural disasters.

This is the same Governor who has no problem with tax gouging year in and year out. He has successfully pushed for spending more and more of the ever-increasing tax revenue (scroll down to "Budget-Finances") surpluses that are a direct result of escalating gas and oil prices. In fact, the Governor's spokesman was recently quick to dismiss any taxpayer relief (subscription) that might negatively impact the state overflowing coffers.

In other news, the Governor's new taxpayer funded $5.5 million dollar jet (subscription) is now in Santa Fe.

District Breakup Discussions Resurface

I recently received an email inviting me to attend an upcoming New Mexico First event. Apparently, the Legislative Education Study Committee has contracted with New Mexico First to convene a town hall utilizing their consensus process to deliver a report on the “APS Organization and Structure for Maximum Student Success.” It is expected that one questions which is bound to arise is “should APS be redistricted.”

Redistricted? If that's another way of putting should APS be broken up (subscription) into multiple districts, I agree with former Governor Gary Johnson and believe the answer is a resounding, "no."

At some point, hopefully our legislators and others will begin to understand that research shows that changes in the overall administrative and governance structure at the district and state level have no measurable impact on student performance. Recent statewide performance after the heavily pushed restructuring of state's education system prove this to be true.

Unfortunately, prior committments make it impossible for me to spend three days back to back (pdf) on this discussion. What are those committments? Well, I'll be coaching elementary school kids on the finer points of soccer on Friday and in a game on Saturday, and I'll be volunteering through Junior Achievement at a local high school. You know, things that improve student performance.

Can't Help But Note

My heart and prayers goes out to all of the victims of Katrina, and I applaud the Governor's decision to send up to 600 New Mexico Guardsmen (subscription) to help with relief efforts. Yet, I can't help but reflect back on how that compares to the level of commitment Governor Richardson recently demonstrated after deciding to declare a State of Emergency in New Mexico.

What's a Patsy to Do?

Interesting look at the dilemma facing Attorney General, Patricia Madrid.