New Political Blogger Down South

Always glad to welcome a new political blogger to the scene. The latest New Mexican to start poliblogging is Aaron Henry Diaz, a nineteen year old from a political family in Las Cruces. I'm not crazy about his top two choices for President (either McCain or Richardson), but he does ask an interesting question:

I would also like to learn why the Republicans of New Mexico are so inefficient and disunited that in turn allows a one party system in this state. I think Mario Burgos offers a clear commentary on the subject.

Ok, you got me, I liked the fact he says I offer a clear commentary on the subject (see Ben, flattery will get you links). Anyway, check out Aaron's blog. I'm not sure if he is to the right or the left, but it doesn't really matter. We need more nineteen year olds in New Mexico who feel blogging "is a tremendous opportunity for me to be a 'citizen soldier' and initiate a dialogue on issues that affect our society."

The Biggest Surprise of the Weekend

A lot more readers than usual came by to visit the blog this weekend. And, I do a mean a lot. The regulars know that I rarely write on the weekend, and this one was no exception. After all, a man can not live by politics alone. There is also golf.

With regard to the GOP election, let's leave it that I'm glad the intraparty race is now behind us, and we can now focus, under the continued leadership of Chairman Allen Weh, on the tasks at hand - namely, getting Republicans elected in 2008. A task that might be made easier as the full breadth of the Courthouse kickback scandals (subscription) continues to unfold :

The practice has become commonplace.

For example, Design Collaborative Southwest got help from another former public official— Tom Rutherford— in getting the contract for the Barbara and Bill Richardson Pavilion, an addition to the University of New Mexico Hospital.

The architectural and engineering work cost $10.5 million, according to a fact sheet distributed by the university.

Rutherford served in the state Senate for 24 years. He was a county commissioner for two terms, through the end of 2004, the year the hospital project was approved.

Rob Perry, an attorney for Schiff, said Rutherford was used as "government affairs liaison" in helping the firm get the contract for the hospital expansion.

Richard Braun, president of Studio Southwest Architects, the successor to Design Collaborative Southwest, said he had no information about Rutherford's role with the firm.

Rutherford could not be reached by the Journal. State records indicate Rutherford is now a lobbyist for the University of New Mexico.

Oh, and it looks like the newly elected Democratic Party Chairman, Brian Colon, is already going to have his hands full trying to keep some folks from getting back into office:

Former Secretary of State Rebecca Vigil-Giron wants to be lieutenant governor.

You might be thinking that she’s looking to get on a ticket in 2010. Vigil-Giron, however, is thinking about next year.

She told me that during the Democrats’ convention in Las Cruces today.

Rebecca Vigil-Giron back in office. It's like a dream come true for Republicans. Remember, this is the lady whose fiscal mismanagement of the Secretary of State's office was so severe that it resulted in a Richardson job offer being revoked put on hold:

Richardson said he wasn't aware the shortfall was that big.

"I was not aware of the size of the deficit," he said. "I was aware there was some expenses that hadn't been paid but when I learned that was $3 million, I think it's important we get all the facts and we make sure a proper audit is done."

The governor's announcement [regarding Rebecca Vigil-Giron's appointment being put on hold] followed Sen. Shannon Robinson, an Albuquerque Democrat, yanking his sponsorship of an administration bill this week that would create the Media Arts and Entertainment Department, of which the film museum would be a part. Robinson was the only Senate sponsor.

House Republicans tried but failed to stop a similar bill in that chamber.

Even with his call for an audit, the governor defended Vigil-Giron.

He said she "has served the state, she's been an elected official, she's contributed to state government in New Mexico and I believe she deserves an opportunity to stay in state government."

Of course, you've got to love the Governor's logic in that last paragraph, "[Vigil-Giron] contributed to state government in New Mexico and I believe she deserves an opportunity to stay in state government."

Hmm, I wonder... let's try that a few different ways...

"Manny Aragon contributed to state government in New Mexico and I believe he deserves an opportunity to stay in state government."

"Robert Vigil contributed to state government in New Mexico and I believe he deserves an opportunity to stay in state government."

Michael Montoya contributed to state government in New Mexico and I believe he deserves an opportunity to stay in state government."

Folks, that line of reasoning is right up there with Governor Richardson's rationale for withholding judgment on Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez.

Enough is Enough - The Whole Truth

Tonight something happened that has angered and saddened me...

I got a call from the State Republican Party informing me that Bernalillo County Republican Party Chairman, Fernando C' de Baca, had put me on a list as a State Central Committee Member from Bernalillo County not in good standing. Below is the text of the letter:

April 26, 2007

Lou Melvin
RPNM Rules Committee Chairwoman
5150-A San Francisco NE
Albuquerque, NM 87109

Dear Lou -

In accordance with Rule 10 of the Bernalillo County Republican Party Supplementary Rules, the following State Central Committee Members from Bernalillo County are not in good standing.

Please consider this a formal challenge of the following State Central Committee members:

Christopher Atencio
Mario Burgos
John Butrick
Samuel Carnes
Whitney Cheshire
Diego Espinoza
State Representative Justin Fox-Young
Elaine Henederson
Wade Jackson
Enrique Knell
Fran Langholf
Vickie Perea
Patrick Rogers
Patricia Rush
Dianne Shams-Avari
Matthew Stackpole

Each of these State Central Committee members from Bernalillo County were assessed dues on March 30, 2007 via a dues statement sent them through the mail.

Sincerely,

Fernando C. De Baca, Chairman

Cc: RPNM Rules Committee, RPNM Secretary Nina Martinez

Ok, let's start with the obvious. This is pure and utter rubbish. Rule (10) cited in the letter above reads as follows:

10. DUES

A. The Republican Party of Bernalillo County Central Committee shall assess annual dues to be paid by the members.
B. With consent of the chairman, members may substitute volunteer service to the Republican Party of Bernalillo County in lieu of dues.
C. The Republican Party of Bernalillo County shall review member status quarterly.
D. County Central Committee members whose dues are in arrears shall not vote at Central Committee meetings and are subject to removal from the committee by the Republican Party of Bernalillo County Executive Committee as authorized bi-annually by the County Central Committee.

How is it possible that the Republican Party of Bernalillo County could have mailed the first dues statement on March 30, 2007, and have already held a member status quarterly review? The simple answer: they couldn't. But apparently, Mr. C' de Baca feels he has the right to rewrite the rules as he sees fit. Heck, this latest letter is even in direct contradiction to what he had printed on the bottom of the quarterly dues statement less than 30 days ago:

In accordance with Rules of the Bernalillo County Republican Party, each County Central Committee member must pay dues of $10 per month. If you become (3) months delinquent, your name may be removed from the Bernalillo County Central Committee Roster.

Folks, not even one month has passed, let alone three. In fact, at the Bernalillo County Central Committee on March 18th, everyone paid their first month's dues of $10 - it was the only way they would let you vote.

And, by the way, I know what it says on the statement because I had already written a check for a $120 to be sent to Bernalillo County Republican Party. Why a $120? Well, because I don't believe that people who can't afford it should be charged a tax by the Republican Party to participate in party politics. So, I offered to pay the quarterly dues of some folks, including a young mother from our Ward whose husband, a former state police officer, is volunteering in Iraq to provide armed protection for Americans.

So, what could motivate Chairman C' de Baca to act in such a devious manner? Is he one of those county leaders Mr. Greer mentioned to the press as encouraging him to run? Is this a way to weed out people who might not support Mr. Greer's campaign? Is this their idea of taking the party back to the grassroots level? Do we really want people leading our party who believe that disenfranchising voters is the way to win elections?

When I ran last month for Bernalillo County Republican Party Chairman, Mr. C' de Baca pulled these same shennigans. He happily padded County Party coffers with the money of absentee self-nominees, but then refused to allow those people to be elected to at-large positions. He even went so far as to change the convention rules less than 36 hours before the convention.

After the election, I chose not to dwell on these actions for the sake of the Party. But now, for the sake of the Party, I refuse to continue to remain silent.

During that election, I heard from a few people who took issue with a card I had mailed and handed out at the county convention that pointed out:

1. fundraising failures under Mr. C' de Baca's tenure
   
2. the failure to deliver Bernalilo County for Congresswoman Heather Wilson for the first time... EVER!
   
3. his decision to publicly endorse Democratic candidates
   

Among those who took issue with what I had to say was State Senator Joe Carraro. Senator Carraro took to the stage waving the card and saying that we must no longer tolerate this type of negative campaigning. I'm not sure when examining someone's job performance record became negative campaigning, but if we want to get more Republicans elected in New Mexico, we're going to have to do it a little more often.

I made a decision in that race to focus on Mr. C' de Baca's performance failures, but I also made a decision not to attack him personally. I chose not to point out Mr. C' de Baca's criminal conviction from 1996:

Here’s what the Albuquerque Tribune (7/24/96) reported about C de Baca’s 1996 bid-rigging conviction in California:

Fernando C de Baca, 58, of Albuquerque pleaded guilty Tuesday in San Diego County District Court to conspiring to inflate bids for asbestos removal at two malls owned by the Hahn Co. of San Diego. One of them was Coronado Center in Albuquerque.

C de Baca and his co-defendant, Thomas Sytko . . . agreed to pay a $600,000 fine. C de Baca’s share was $150,000 . . .

Robert Fellmeth, a former prosecutor and the founder of the Center for Public Interest Law at the University of San Diego School of Law, called the fines the largest he can recall for criminal antitrust violations in California.

C de Baca won the contracts in return for kickbacks to Sytko. The scheme netted the two men about $310,000.

C de Baca barely avoided a three-year prison sentence. In addition to the California fine, C de Baca also paid a $25,000 fine in a settlement with New Mexico prosecutors.

When he ran for the State Senate last year, this is how C de Baca characterized the bid-rigging/kickback episode when the Albuquerque Tribune inquired about his criminal record:

In 1996 I was convicted of an anti-trust violation in California and paid a fine. My case was reviewed by the Superior Court of California in early 2004. The charge was dismissed and expunged.

I opted not to draw attention to Mr. C' de Baca's questionable financial reporting practices and the risks they posed for the Bernalillo County Republican Party. For example, on his December 7, 2006 report with the Secretary of State, Mr. C' de Baca showed $19,784 in in-kind contributions, but only $3,709.28 in expenditures. And that poses a serious problem:

In-Kind Contributions, according to Paragraph 5, FEC Code from www.fec.gov.

A committee reports the value of an in-kind contribution in the same way it reports a monetary contribution. In addition, as with all in-kind contributions, the committee must report the value of the in-kind contribution as an operating expenditure. Moreover, an in-kind contribution itemized on Schedule A must also be itemized on a Schedule B for operating expenditures. 104.13 and 110.1(e).

In other words, BCRP must show all in-kind contributions as both a "contribution" and an "expenditure" according to the FEC. This was not done. In fact, Fernando and Cecilia C' de Baca personally claimed a combined total of $44,714.00 in-kind contribution over an 11 month period, but NOWHERE can the matching expenditure be found. To make matter worse, according to the FEC, it is illegal to claim "in-kind contributions" from volunteers.

I also decided not to bring up the fact that the Executive Director, employed by the Bernalillo County Republican Party and hired by Mr. C' de Baca, spent Election Night partying with Patricia Madrid supporters at her "Victory" Party. Or, the fact that this same individual, proudly has posted pictures on his personal website of himself posing with pornography star Jenna Jameson while wearing a t-shirt advertising her website.


These are all issues I opted not to raise at that time because I didn't feel they were relevant to the election at hand. I was wrong. Mr. C' de Baca's past criminal conviction for bid-rigging clearly demonstrated he is willing to win at any cost - lawful or not. His latest attempt to disenfranchise Republican grassroot activists through fraudulent means shows he has not changed much in the last 10 years - simply moving from bid-rigging to election-rigging.

The fact that Mr. Greer has sought to align himself with such a man does not bode well for Mr. Greer. You can tell a lot about a person by the company they keep. Speaking of which, go back and take a look at that list at the beginning of this post. Included with me are:

1. A State Representative who just spent more than 60 days fighting for Republican values
2. Three underpaid staffers of the State Party who work tirelessly on our behalf.
3. The recently elected 2nd Vice-Chair of the Bernalillo County Republican Party - the only uncontested candidate at the recent county convention.
   
4. A staffer from Congresswoman Heather Wilson's office
5. Fran Langholf, a volunteer legend in Republican circles
   
6. Our Secretary of State candidate in this last election who worked tirelessly both in 2004 and 2006.
   
7. A Republican lawyer who volunteers his time over and over again to defend our rights

And, I could go on, but you get the idea. These are the Party faithful. The type of people we need to duplicate if we are ever to succeed in achieving a two-party state. These are the type of people some county chairman would like to see removed from the picture. You've got to ask yourself, "Why?"

Encouraging Competition is One Thing

I'm the first one to encourage competition when it comes to elections. I ran in a Republican primary against two others for a State House legislative seat, and just a month ago, I lost in a race against the incumbent Chairman of the Bernalillo County Republican Party. I don't believe that if one Republican holds a position, every other Republican should just back off and wait until that person steps down or dies.

I also believe that people who are running for something should, well, should run. That means making a decision and putting yourself out there to answer the tough questions. Which is why this little tidbit from yesterday's Albuquerque Journal is so troubling (subscription):

Greer, the Sierra County GOP chairman for nearly five years, plans to formally announce his candidacy for the state chairmanship on Thursday. He said he had been talking with other county GOP leaders and encouraged to run.

"We want to take the party back to the grass roots, back to the counties, back to the Republicans that do the work and actually do the voting,'' Greer said in a telephone interview.

He is a real estate broker and rancher from Truth or Consequences, and ran unsuccessfully last year for a seat on the Public Regulation Commission.

Weh, who became GOP chairman in 2004, said he can provide continuity in the party organization.

"A lot of people convinced me that it was important that an experienced chairman continue at this point and take it through the presidential election,'' said Weh.

I've met Earl Greer. We recently spent an evening sitting together at the same table at the State GOP Lincoln Dinner. I like him. But, if we were sitting together tonight for dinner, I'd have to say:

Earl, what the heck are you thinking? Who announces a candidacy three days before an election and expects to be taken seriously? C'mon Earl, you know better than that.

Part of the reason, I am so shocked by this approach is that it's not like this is the first time he has run for office. In 2002 he ran for NM's 2nd Congressional District (CD) seat. According to PoliticalMoneyLine.com, he only raised $37,039. Not nearly enough to run an effective campaign, and it showed. Of the five gentleman running for the seat, Mr. Greer placed 5th in the GOP primary.

The next year, Mr. Greer decided to run for the State Party 2nd CD Vice Chairman position and that time, he placed 4th in a four-way race. Then just last year, he lost the Public Regulatory Commission race. Now, I'm strong believer that when it comes to politics, you can learn a lot by your failures. I know I have. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem that Mr. Greer has.

As a member of State Central Committee, I've received nearly a dozen letters and more than a few phone calls from, or in support of, Chairman Allen Weh's. The only notification I've had that anyone else was running was that little blurb embedded in the Albuquerque Journal article referenced above. And, it doesn't even say Mr. Greer wants to run. All it says is that others encouraged him to run. That's no way to run a race.

Moreover, what's this nonsense about taking "the party back to the grass roots, back to the counties, back to the Republicans that do the work and actually do the voting." Everyone knows that politics is local. You can't take something back to something it already is. This really makes no sense to me.

Not to mention, that if your "campaign" - and with only three days to go, I use that term loosely - is based on getting back to the "Republicans that do the work," don't you think the State Central Committee members, those folks elected at the Ward level, deserve a little more communication - you know, a personal letter or two, a phone call, something that let's us know someone is running.

The bottom line here is that the only way Mr. Greer's run could be successful is if back room deals have been made. The fact that Mr. Greer thinks he can win the election without reaching out to the Republicans that do the work at the local level is very troubling.

Another Iglesais Media Moment

So, a lot has been made of the fact that fired, disgruntled former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias' was the inspiration for Tom Cruise's character in a Few Good Men. However, based on Mr. Iglesias' side-splitting analysis of the testimony of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, I'm guessing Hollywood took a lot of liberties in creating that character. Seriously, you've got to read this:

David Iglesias, the former New Mexico U.S. attorney and one of the eight fired last year, said investigating the White House's role is the logical next step -- one that would follow existing clues about Rove's involvement.

"If I were Congress, I would say, 'If the attorney general doesn't have answers, then who would?' There's enough evidence to indicate that Karl Rove was involved up to his eyeballs."

Iglesias said another clue that the White House may have been the driving force is the relative lack of Justice Department documentation for the firings in the 6,000 pages of documents turned over to Congress.

"If you want to justify getting rid of someone, you should have at least some paper trail," Iglesias said. "There's been a remarkable absence of that. I'm wondering if the paper trail is at the White House."

Whoa, didn't Mr. Iglesias read the fine print in his political appointment? You know, the part the explained the political appointment made by the president that allowed him to serve as U.S. Attorney at the pleasure of the president. Maybe he should hire himself a good employment lawyer who could explain to him exactly what all that legal mumbo jumbo means.

Obviously, Mr. Iglesias is finding it all very confusing. He is having a tremendously difficult time understanding that whole "at-will" component. Mr. Iglesias just can't seem to comprehend that no paper trail was required to fire him. Then again, maybe he just thought that whole U.S. Attorney appointment was like an appointment to the Supreme Court - one of those lifetime gigs.

One more thing... I fail to see what it matters if the White House was involved. I would expect the White House to be involved. How else could someone who serves at the pleasure of the president be terminated? I'd be concerned if the White House was not involved. So forget this whole "paper trail is at the White House nonsense."

Speaking of paper trails, I'm wondering how that FOIA request is progressing?

Moving from Laptops to iPods

The New Mexico State Legislature appropriations never ceases to amaze me. When it comes to education, we have some of the worse worst performing schools in the nation. Yet, rather than getting back to basics, they throw tacpayer taxpayer funds at one bad idea after another. It wasn't that long ago that they gave every 7th grader at Tohatchi middle school a laptop computer. Now, they're giving iPods to the kids (subscription):

Cutting-edge technology sets Southwest Secondary Learning Center apart and keeps the charter school's waiting list long, principal Dolly Juarez said.

Still, $40,000 for iPods that the school got from the state Legislature may be too extravagant for Albuquerque Public Schools, and officials said they may reject it.

"We can always say 'no,' " said Kizito Wijenje, APS capital master plan director. "Last year, we got money for SUVs, and we said 'no.' "

The school wants the iPods, which cost between $250 and $350 each, so students who don't have high-speed Internet connections at home can download lectures whenever or wherever they want, Juarez said.

Yeah, I'm sure the kids are going to use the iPods for downloading lectures. Just like those laptops helped Tohatchi Middle School start making "adequate yearly progress." Oops, wait that didn't happen.

Then again, maybe this brilliant iPod idea also has Governor Richardson's blessing. I'm thinking this is a presidential campaign platform with legs - an iPod for every American.

Governor Richardson's Racist Comment

It wasn't that long ago that Governor Richardson had that embarrassing accidental presidential candidacy announcement on Fox News. You remember, right? The one where he defined how he was running, and then had to backpedal fast to say he didn't mean he was running. Here, let me refresh your memory:

In a news release issued around 5:30 p.m. today, Gallegos added: “FOX News incorrectly reported that Governor Richardson has announced he will run for president. When asked directly whether he will run for president, Governor Richardson said he will make a final decision in January.

“Other comments from the interview were taken out of context based on a hypothetical question that FOX News posed about the Governor’s strengths should he run for president.”

Fox's Web site quoted Richardson as saying "I am Hispanic, which I believe is an asset. But I'm not running as an Hispanic. I am running as an American who is proud to be Hispanic."

Well, it looks like that episode is about to come back and bite the Governor yet again. This time people are surely going to take notice that less than six months have passed since, Governor Richardson was emphatically proclaiming that he was "not running as an Hispanic."

Yet, yesterday Governor Richardson was quoted as saying:

Presidential candidate and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson (D) said Monday the reason he has not called for the removal of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales is that the two both have Hispanic backgrounds.

Richardson, in an interview with The Hill, said he is “pretty close” to making such a call, but added that he is reluctant to do so before Gonzales’s Senate testimony despite the high-profile involvement of New Mexico in the U.S. attorneys scandal.
“The only reason I’m not there is because he’s Hispanic, and I know him and like him,” Richardson said, adding, “It’s because he’s Hispanic. I’m honest.

“I want to give him the benefit of the doubt.”

WHOA! The Governor of New Mexico, who also happens to be running for President of the United States, is on the record as saying that he is not calling for removal of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales because Gonzales is Hispanic? That is SO wrong on SO many levels.

First off, it's racist (and it's not the first time). For Governor Richardson to say he is holding AG Alberto Gonzales to a different standard level because he is Hispanic is insulting to all Hispanics.

I take that back.

It's insulting to everyone who supports equal treatment under the law regardless of someone's race. How can Bill Richardson the "accomplished" diplomat, who loves to tout his nomination for several Nobel Peace Prizes, not know that there is something terribly wrong with making political decisions based on racially defined parameters? How can someone like this be seriously considered as a candidate for President of the United States?

I don't think he can. Imagine the other candidates - on either side of the aisle - saying they are withholding judgment because the individual in question, like them, is: Caucasian, African-American, Mormon, or a woman. Now imagine them getting elected to the highest office in the land. You can't right? Me either.

2004 Election Fraud Concerned Democrats

It turns out that the election fraud perpetrated in New Mexico in 2004 was a concern to Democrats as well as as Republicans (Hat tip: American Spectator). In fact, it was a big enough deal that recently released documents by the U.S. House Committee on the Judiciary show that Senator Jeff Bingaman's (D-NM) office called not once, but twice before the election in 2004 to determine the status. See the released supporting documentation below:



So, what does this all mean? Well, the folks over at the American Spectator have this take:

Is there anything wrong with this? Probably not. But it shows that it can be an entirely innocent and normal thing for senators to inquire, during election season, about the status of investigations with political ramifications. It takes at least some of the sting out of the breathless allegations against Domenici.

Granted, there are two differences in the cases. First, Domenici called Iglesias directly, whereas it was Bingaman's chief of staff who called and it was to the legislative affairs office at Justice, not to Iglesias, that he made his call. Second, there is no evidence that Bingaman did anything further that could be interpreted as putting political pressure on Iglesias or on DoJ, whereas it appeared that Domenici forwarded his complaints to the White House.

But the fact remains that it is just flat-out inaccurate to assert that senators are necessarily out of line to express concern about politically tinged investigations. The Democrats' pretense to the contrary is not just hypocritical, but a rank descent into character assassination of a sort that can, by tying up resources, distract attention from the actual job of law enforcement.

For those of you out there who are trying to pretend voter fraud did not occur in 2004, please take special note that it was Democrat County Clerk Mary Herrera "who asked to meet about 3,000 suspicious registrations." And, the lack of prosecutorial action by David Iglesias in after a year's passage is what led to Senator Domenici's well documented first complaint in September of 2005 to the Department of Justice.

How Much More Proof Do You Want?

Several weeks back, I put up the video that showed the press was covering the 2004 Voter Fraud problems. The problems that disgruntled former, U.S. Attorney David Iglesias never saw fit to get around to prosecuting. At least one blogger feels that seeing the evidence documented in the evening news is just not enough proof.

So, I'm wondering if this Albuquerque Tribune article from earlier this years might constitute proof that we have a voter fraud problem in New Mexico that would have warranted prosecution by Mr. Iglesias:

The new state elections director's anecdote about personal brushes with voting fraud have riled a number of county clerks and left others scratching their heads.

At a meeting of county clerks in Santa Fe on Jan. 23, Daniel Ivey-Soto recounted several conversations he'd had over the years with people who told him they'd used other people's identities to cast multiple votes, according to Ivey-Soto and others in attendance.

"I have been in conversations with people who have told me that, at various times, they've voted more than once on Election Day," Ivey Soto said in an interview this week. "It happens. Apparently some people were shocked by that."

Santa Fe County Clerk Valerie Espinoza, a Democrat, was one of them.

"To make those comments to a group of county clerks was really just unbelievable," she said. "As a lawyer, he knew that voting fraud is a felony, and if you know someone who does that, why don't you tell the attorney general?"

Otero County Clerk Robyn Silva, a Republican, echoed those comments.

Okay, obviously this is an issue that is offensive to both sides of the aisle - at least those that care about fair elections. Oh, and lest anyone say this was a joke that got out of hand:

Other clerks said they thought Ivey-Soto might have been joking.

He wasn't.

Ivey-Soto, who took over as election chief three weeks ago despite having no experience running elections, said he recounted the conversations to make a serious point.

"In any system where people are allowed to express their opinion, you're going to get a certain amount of fraud," he said. "On `American Idol' you get people who call in to vote 16 or 17 times."

He said the conversations about voting fraud happened more than three years ago and suggested some may have been protected by attorney-client privilege.

Ok, am I the only one who finds it unnerving that the state's election director believes a certain amount of fraud is ok? Folks, he actually compares New Mexico voter fraud to American Idol, where people are encouraged to vote as many times as possbile for their favorite candidate.

With attitudes like this running rampant in Democratic circles that control state elections, is it really any wonder that people were frustrated by the lack of action by Mr. Iglesias? A Republican U.S. Attorney in a Democratic state plagued by public corruption scandals and voter fraud should be a proactive prosecutor, not a guy who is so inactive (subscription) that New Mexicans don't know what he does:

At his farewell news conference, Iglesias joked that he was often referred to as the "District Attorney" and that many New Mexicans were unfamiliar with what his position actually was.

From a public relations standpoint, the Department of Justice did not handle the firings of the U.S. Attorney's well. And, in the case of David Iglesias, part of the problem is that they kept him in the job too long.

Diversity of Opinions Unwelcome

It looks like one blogger is getting a taste of how Bill Richardson's most ardent supporters deal with dissenting opinions. In a nutshell, they are unwelcomed.

======== Deleted Comment at “Richardson for America” =========

In all of Gov. Richardson’s travels to North Korea, did he ever ask his hosts about Camp 22? Does he know what goes on in there? Do you? There are 50,000 men, women, and children in Camp 22 and up to a quarter of them die there each year. Most die from hunger, disease, and abuse, but not all. Here’s what happened to one family:

‘I witnessed a whole family being tested on suffocating gas and dying in the gas chamber,’ he said. ‘The parents, son and and a daughter. The parents were vomiting and dying, but till the very last moment they tried to save kids by doing mouth-to-mouth breathing.’

Hyuk has drawn detailed diagrams of the gas chamber he saw. He said: ‘The glass chamber is sealed airtight. It is 3.5 metres wide, 3m long and 2.2m high_ [There] is the injection tube going through the unit. Normally, a family sticks together and individual prisoners stand separately around the corners. Scientists observe the entire process from above, through the glass.’

There are 200,000 men, women, and children in North Korea’s concentration camp system. Camp 22, the worst of these camps, stands alongside Mauthausen and Tuol Sleng as one of human history’s greatest crime scenes. Americans may wonder whether Bill Richardson raised this subject to the North Koreans who (as you suggest) hold him in such great esteem, and with whom he holds such influence. Does he realize just what his amateur diplomacy is legitimizing and perpetuating? What do the words “never again” mean to Bill Richardson? The answers to these questions say much about the kind of person he is, and the kind of president he would be.

Last time I raised this question, you chose the cowardly option of deleting this post and avoiding the issue. But you raised this topic. You’re boasting about the value of Bill Richardson’s warm relationship with these killers. This time, instead of just deleting my post, how about just asking Bill Richardson if he has any plans to mention Camp 22 next time he shakes hands with the men who run the gas chamber?

========= End Deleted Comment =========

Deleting comments that are neither lewd or crude is wrong. Deleting comments that are relevant to a post just because they present an alternate view is downright un-American. And, that is precisely the behavior being exhibited over at the America for Richardson blog.

What is most troubling is that America for Richardson is censoring someone who appears to be VERY knowledgeable about North Korea. According to his site, Joshua Stanton, the author of the One Free Korea Blog, was the U.S. Army Judge Advocate in Korea, 1998-2002. He has advocated the human rights of the North Korean people to ambassadors, including Ambassador John Bolton, and testified before the House International Relations Committee regarding the state of the U.S.-South Korean alliance in 2006.

We're not talking about a political spin doctor here folks. I'm wondering if maybe the good folks over at America for Richardson are taking one too many pages from the North Koreans when it comes to public discourse? It doesn't make for a very pretty picture of America Under Richardson.

UPDATE: America for Richardson has now reposted the deleted comment from One Free Korea on their front page. I'm glad they did. It was the right thing to do.

Department of Justice First Response to FOIA

I promised to keep you informed, so I wanted to let you know that I did receive in yesterday's mail the following response from the Department of Justice (DOJ) dated April 11, 2007:

Dear Mr . Burgos:

Your letter was received by this office via facsimile on April 10, 2007, and was forwarded to the Freedon of Information Act Unit, Executive Office for the United States Attorneys, in Washington, D.C.

Federal Regulation 28 U.S.C. § 16.3 requires that we forward FOIA requests to the FOIA Unit in Washington, D.C. That office coordinates the processing of FOIA requests for all of the United states Attorney offices, and will respond directly to you regarding your request.

Please direct all of your subsequent FOIA matters to the FOIA Unit in Washington, D.C. as this will accelerate the processing of your request. The address for the FOIA Unit is as follows:

Freedom of Information Act/Privacy Act Unit
Executive Office for United States Attorneys
600 E Street, N.W., Room 7300
Washington, D.C. 20530

Telephone (202) 616-6575
Facsimile: (202) 616-6478

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please direct them to the FOIA Unit in Washington, D.C.

Sincerely,

LARRY GOMEZ
acting United States Attorney

RUMALDO R. ARMIJO
Executive Assistant United States Attorney

I also found it interesting that someone in the DOJ decided to use Google to do a little research to learn more about me.
I wonder if that's standard operating procedure or just a little extracurricular activity? It's good to know that people in the government use the same research tools that we do. Who knows, maybe they'll become regular readers.

Video Catchup from In Focus

Several people have commented to me over the last three weeks that they wished they had seen the episode of In-Focus hosted by Albuquerque Tribune Editor Kate Nelson that included State Democratic Party Chairman John Wertheim, Blogger Johnny Knudsen, and myself. So, I'm putting it up.



Please note that the first 11 minutes and 30 seconds are a dialogue between Kate Nelson and former U.S. Attorney John Kelly. If you want to skip to the part that includes the panel, just take the slider and move it over to until the time counter reads 11:30.

It's Like a Sale at Macy's

Paul Gessing over at Rio Grande Foundation had an interesting opinion piece recently published in the Albuquerque Journal (subscription) which began:

Albuquerque Mayor Martin Chavez has proposed a one-eighth cent reduction in the gross-receipts tax rate. If the City Council goes along with the plan, the rate charged within the city would drop from 6.875 cents to 6.75 cents on each dollar spent, and $18 million that would have been budgeted by the city would be returned to taxpayers.

I've been asked by at least one individual in Mayor Martin Chavez's administration, why aren't we - the Republican blogosphere - all over this. We're talking about a tax cut that is worth in the neighborhood of $200 million when all is said and done. Shouldn't we be singing Mayor Marty's praises? Heralding the fact that he is a tax cutting Mayor. Applauding his sense of financial control. You know, the type of guy we could all get behind for Governor in 2010.

Well, to understand the reason for the lack of enthusiasm, you only need to read the rest of the opinion piece:

Gross-receipts tax rates in Albuquerque have jumped in recent years. The current 6.875 percent rate is 18 percent higher than it was as recently as 2000, when the rate was only 5.8125 percent.

That's right in the span of six or so years, we've seen a whopping 18% increase in the gross receipts tax. Today, it is a full 1.0625% higher than it was just six short years ago. Yet, Mayor Chavez can't understand why we're not heralding him as a conquering hero for offering to give back 0.125%. If that 0.125% give back is worth a couple of hundred million, just how much did that rapid tax increase steal from the back pockets of hardworking taxpayers?

We're not excited because it is just not enough. However, with that said, I'll take what I can get, so I do support the return of our money. I also would recommend that any Republican on the City Counsel considering not supporting the tax cut, immediately stop by the County Clerk's office and change their registration to Democrat because that's where they will need to look for support the next time they are up for re-election.

FOIA Request - David Iglesias

I faxed this over this morning, and I'll keep you posted as I receive responses:

Facsimile: 346-7296

FOIA Officer for the United States Attorney
District of New Mexico
Rumaldo Armijo, Esq.
P.O. Box 607
Albuquerque, NM 87103-0607

RE: Freedom of Information Act Request

Dear FOIA Officer:

This is a request under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. § 552) for documents concerning David Iglesias.

I request that a copy of the following documents, or documents containing the following information, be provided to me on an expedited basis:

1. Mr. Iglesias has claimed publicly he was required to go to various out-of-county and out-of-state locations on the orders of the Department of Justice (DOJ). Provide copies of any such orders or instructions. Provide any information that any other US Attorney (USA) traveled out-of-state, using DOJ funds, as much as Mr. Iglesias, during 2000-2007.
   
   
2. DOJ/USA records, including itinerary and expenses for David Iglesias’ DOJ/USA out-of-state travel including but not limited to travel to Mexico, Columbia, Laos from 2000-2007.
   
   
3. Letter(s) signed by Assistant United States Attorneys concerning Mr. Iglesias’ foreign travels, management or other perceived shortcomings.
   
   
4. Mr. Iglesias has recently stated that public corruption cases were not ignored during his tenure. Please provide details of Mr. Iglesias’ calendar during the Vigil trials?
   
   
5. Please provide the result of the investigation and review of the Eric Serna information concerning possible public corruption, bribery, political and "charitable" contributions involving but not limited to Con Alma and Southwest Charities.
   
   
6. Please provide records or statistics as to the public corruption leads and referrals that were not pursued by the USA?
   
   
7. Please provide a list of the public corruption crimes and related crimes that will be, have been or may be adversely impacted by the statute of limitations and the failure of the office, under Mr. Iglesias to proceed in a more prompt manner?
   
   
8. Any 2004 Voter Fraud Task Force report, study or collected documents. Please produce a list of persons on the task force, minutes of meetings, or any correspondence concerning the Task Force.
   
   
9. Mr. Iglesias, since leaving the office of the United States Attorney, has referred to emails concerning contacts with members of the public concerning voter fraud or the “voter fraud task force.” Please provide a set of all copies of DOJ/USA correspondence and emails provided to Mr. Iglesias concerning voter fraud or the Voter Fraud Task Force from members of the public.
   
   
10. Please provide copies of his responses. Please provide the DOJ/USA policy concerning employee access to emails for personal purposes, both during and after employment.
    
    
11. Mr. Iglesias’ presentation to DOJ/USA personnel concerning the formation and operation of voter fraud task forces.
    
    
12. Copies of all of Iglesias’ emails received from, or sent to, members of the public.
    
    
13. Presumably you are aware that Mr. Iglesias stated publicly that "politics" should not play any part in the selection of the next permanent USA for New Mexico. Please produce any correspondence, including e-mails received from or sent to Mr. Iglesias from you or Mr. Gomez, on the topic of the appointment of the next USA.
    
    
14. Please produce the name of any USA that has ever been appointed outside of the current political/constitutional process for the appointments of USAs.

While several of these requests may take some time to locate documents, please do not delay any responses to the more simple requests.

I request a waiver of fees for this request. I intend to make the documents available on a website so that the public has a chance to see the basis of Mr. Iglesias’ public statements and to judge the validity of the criticisms of Mr. Iglesias supposedly contained in letter(s) signed by the AUSAs, reported in the media.

The disclosure of the requested information is important to me and to the public because the former United States Attorney is now giving media interviews, attempting to use selective facts and opinions to argue he was competent and diligent. The requested records, if produced, should allow the public to judge for themselves whether his media arguments are factually based. The disclosure of this information will assist the public to understand whether the chief federal law enforcement official for New Mexico was discharging his duties and, if so, whether those duties were performed in an appropriate and prompt manner.

If charges are absolutely necessary, I will pay up to $100 for these documents with this important public information.


Sincerely,


Mario Burgos

Who Will Go to Jail?

Ok, let's give Governor Richardson the benefit of the doubt for a minute. Let's assume that he has signed ethics legislation which limits campaign contributions because he wants to do some good. I know, considering that Governor Richardson has raised more money from questionable sources than anyone else in New Mexico, it's a stretch. But, let's be optimistic here in viewing this latest presidential campaign ploy (subscription):

Currently, there is no limit on gifts to most public officials or employees.

The new law will impose a $250 limit on the value of individual gifts that can be accepted by a state official, employee or candidate for state office.

There will be a yearly cap of $1,000 on the combined value of gifts that can be given to any one state government official or employee by a lobbyist, their employer or government contractor.

The gift restriction will cover items including food, lodging, transportation and tickets to sporting events or entertainment. However, exempted from the $250 cap will be retirement gifts to a state official or employee [hmm, this must be the deferred payment plan?].

Violations of the new law will be a petty misdemeanor, which is punishable by up to six months in jail and a $500 fine.

So, here is my question? Who is going to go to jail for six months when the $1,000 gift cap is exceeded? Will it be the lobbyist, who spent $475 on dinners and entertainment during the session on a particular legislator? Or, will it be their employer who maybe invited the legislator and his or her family to enjoy a couple of sporting events at a $475 value. Or, maybe the secretary who sends a card with flowers for a legislators birthdays at a cost of $55? Should it be the secretary if she was the last one to send a gift that puts them over the top?

This law is ridiculous. If they really wanted ethics reform to deal with gifts to legislators, then they should have just outlawed all gifts. Period, end of story.

"How to Ink a Book Deal" by David Iglesias

Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias is suffering from withdrawal - media limelight withdrawal. Iglesias fatigue has set in with the media and the public in general, so the media focus has shifted on to the prosecution of the LONG AWAITED courthouse indictments - something actually newsworthy.

So, what's Mr. Iglesias to do? Well, according to the Albuquerque Journal (subscription):

Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias is seeking the help of a federal investigative office to determine if he was fired illegally for missing work to serve in the U.S. Naval Reserve.

Iglesias, who was forced to resign Dec. 7 after five years as New Mexico's U.S. attorney, has previously contended he was fired for political reasons. He has also suggested the Justice Department later developed a case to show he was fired for poor job performance.

This week, he filed a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel, an investigative arm of the federal government, asking it to investigate if he was illegally fired for fulfilling his Naval Reserve obligations.

Iglesias said he was approached by officials from the Office of Special Counsel about filing a complaint.

Now, it's that last paragraph above that warrants your additional attention. The disgruntled former U.S. Attorney is attempting to paint the picture that he is just responding to a request from the Office of Special Counsel, but this is where it gets a little suspect:

Loren Smith, an OSC spokesman, confirmed that Iglesias has filed a complaint and that the agency is investigating.

Smith said he was unsure exactly how the complaint was initiated but said Iglesias is a friend of a staffer at the agency and that the two had discussed the matter before the complaint was filed.

Hmm, if I was a cynic, I might think this is all about trying to add a few chapters to that planned "inspirational" book (subscription) and maybe improve the chances of inking a deal:

Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias said Thursday he might write a book to tell his life story and wants a government retraction and apology for his firing.

Iglesias told the Journal on Thursday that he has been approached by three "literary agents"— two from the East Coast and one from the West Coast— who have expressed interest in signing him to a book deal.

The New Mexico Republican, who was forced to resign as the state's U.S. attorney on Dec. 7, declined to name the agents or publishing houses and said he has not yet inked a deal.

After all, it's not like the major publishing houses need to put out another travel guide.


NOTE: Turn on KNME's The Line tonight at 7:00 p.m. to catch me talking about the latest and greatest.

APS Sues Volunteers

This article (subscription) in today's Journal is very troubling:

For years, Albuquerque students in the band Mariachi San Jose entertained audiences at festivals and competitions across the region.

Now, Albuquerque Public Schools is fighting a group of parent volunteers in court over money raised to support the group and for the right to use the name "Mariachi San Jose."

At issue is whether Mariachi San Jose is a school program or an independent community program.

APS filed a lawsuit against some of the group's parent volunteers last month. Attempts to resolve the dispute through a court mediator failed Tuesday, according to parents and school officials.

The relationship between APS and the volunteers soured last summer, and everyone agrees that students have suffered the most.

It wasn't that long ago that Governor Bill Richardson was on his soap box talking about the need for government to get involved in promoting parental involvement. Now, APS is again in the spotlight for going out of its way to DISCOURAGE parental involvement.

Think about this, you have the state's largest school district, a district with boatloads of taxpayer money, suing parents, who are in all likelihood taxpayers, to keep them from being involved. Something is seriously wrong with this picture. And it only gets worse:

Forming another mariachi group is fine, APS says, but there's no question that Mariachi San Jose is a school-based group because it started at East San Jose.

Since when does a school fight for ownership rights? Isn't the school's purpose to serve the community? So what if the parents started the program at the school? Parents starting a program at a school is a good thing. Does APS really want to discourage this type of initiative by SEIZING a successful volunteer driven programs? It's not like there is any inappropriate behavior occurring:

But [APS deputy superintendent Tom] Savage said a recent audit of the group's activity fund at East San Jose didn't uncover any accounting problems.

Theses actions by APS are sending the wrong message to all volunteers who contribute their time to programs throughout the district that benefit our students. I strongly encourage you to let APS know that suing volunteers is not the answer to improving student achievement. Ask the Superintendent, Dr. Beth Everitt, to stop this nonsense. You might also consider contacting the APS Board.

Donating to Charity

I'm all for supporting charities, but this practice of politicians announcing in the press that they are turning tainted money over to their favorite charity (subscription) just doesn't sit right with me.

Richardson on Monday vowed to donate to charity all of the campaign money his camp received from people or companies implicated in the courthouse scandal.

Lt. Gov. Diane Denish and state Attorney General Gary King followed suit on Tuesday. And the state chairman of a group that battled— mostly unsuccessfully— for sweeping ethics reform in the just-concluded state legislative session said every politician who took money from Schultz should do likewise.

The purpose of campaign contributions is to buy awareness and influence voters, and by publicly acknowledging that you're donating it to a cause, that money is working precisely the way it was supposed to work. Wasn't Eric Serna being investigated for soliciting contributions to his favorite charity? I'm not sure this is too different.

Is it really necessary for politicians to issue press releases to announce who the recipients of the donation will be? Doesn't this seem a bit unwarranted:

Denish in a news release Tuesday said she is giving $1,000 in contributions from those implicated in the scandal to the New Mexico Cancer Center Foundation.

A very worthy cause, but did the Lt. Governor really need to release who would be the beneficiary of the donation. It seems to me that the money should just be returned to the donor. It may not be the most productive use of the dollars, but the alternative, at least with the fanfare it is being given, just doesn't seem right.

ABQ Journal Editorial Non Sequitur

Talk about missing the mark, the Albuquerque Journal missed it today and missed it by a long shot. How can the editorial board of the state's largest daily newspaper be so easily duped as to believe "ethics reform" is going to have any effect on stopping crooks, thieves and swindlers?

Read this opening paragraph to today's editorial (subscription):

If having the former leader of the New Mexico Senate indicted in a multimillion-dollar kickback scheme doesn't scream "we need ethics reform," then probably nothing does.

Most states have limits on campaign contributions. Most have some form of an independent ethics commission empowered to oversee public officials. But in New Mexico, the sky's still the limit when it comes to campaign donations, and government officials are still expected to police themselves.

That is a complete and total non sequitur. What in the world does a construction kickback scheme have to do with campaign contributions? Anybody want to bet that Governor Richardson's folks walked into the editorial board and fed them this nonsense? Probably no need to bet, since the giveaway is found towards the end of the editorial:

Despite prodding from Gov. Bill Richardson, neither ethics measure was deemed worthy enough of lawmakers' attention to warrant up-or-down roll call votes. And that should get the public's attention.

Give me a break. Governor Bill Richardson has steered the biggest and most successful pay to play administration New Mexico has ever seen. Moreover, this is the Governor who fought tooth and nail to keep any campaign contribution limits from being thrust upon him before he ran for re-election. C'mon Journal, it was only a year ago, and it was reported in your pages (subscription):

Gov. Bill Richardson wants lawmakers to postpone work on broad ethics or lobbying reforms until next year and instead focus on anti-corruption proposals developed in the wake of a kickback scandal involving state treasurers.

Richardson's comments came Wednesday after a Senate committee unanimously approved a bill to prohibit campaign contributions and most gifts to legislators and state elected officials — such as the governor and treasurer — from companies and individuals providing investment or financial services to the state.

At the time, Governor Richardson gave some lame excuse about thirty days not being enough time to fully consider ethics reform. So, please explain to me, if thirty days is not enough time, then how the heck is a week and a half special session enough time?

It's mind blowing to me that the editorial board fell for such obvious political spin. They should be seasoned enough to have recognized it for what it was. An absentee Governor trying to save face for making a poor executive decision by forcing the legislature back into session right on the heels of a 60 day session.

Schumer Releases Official Transcript of Domenici Call to Iglesias

I don't usually write on Sunday's, but this is just too important to wait until tomorrow. In an apparent attempt to keep the partisan bashing of New Mexico's Republican Congressional Representatives alive, Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) earlier today released the official transcripts of the now infamous call between former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias and U.S. Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM).

Under a little known section of the Patriot Act, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has been recording all conversations between its members and other branches of U.S. Government. When the Senate was under Republican control, this information was only used to keep the caucus voting as a block. However, now that the tide has turned, and the Democrats control the Senate, the Democratic Senatorial Congressional Committee (DSCC) is on record as saying they will shamelessly use the information as often as necessary to win additional seats in the Senate for Democrats.

In what will most likely go down in the history books as the beginning of a new dawn in American politics, Senator Schumer, at the urging of former New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid, has released the transcript below from that fateful day in October:

5:04 p.m. October 27, 2006

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: Hello, this is Pete. I want to -

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Just a second, Pete. Honey, can you turn up the volume.

Heard in the background: "YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Ah, I love that scene. Pete, did I ever tell you the movie a Few Good Men was based on my life?

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: Yes, David. Now listen, I have something important to ask you?

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Pete, hold on a second. Sweetheart, where's the suntan lotion? Oh, thanks. Pete, have you ever been to Bali Bali?

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: No, David, I haven't. The reason I'm calling -

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Me neither. I can't thank you enough for getting me this job. The foreign travel perks have been FANTASTIC. I've seen more of the world in this job than in my whole time in the service. In fact, if it wasn't for the all this legal stuff they keep asking me to do, I'd say this was the best darn job in the whole world.

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: David, that's why I'm calling. You see, people are calling me, and complaining about -

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Oh, Pete, don't worry about that. You're so old school. People call me all the time. I just have them put straight into voicemail. After all, a guy can only listen to so much whining about voter fraud. This is New Mexico, of course we have voter fraud. Pete, you got to learn to just ignore folks.

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: David, are you going to file indictments before your next trip abroad in November?

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: No.

U.S. Senator Pete Domenici: I'm sorry to hear that.

Sound of line going dead.

U.S. Attorney David Iglesias: Pete, Pete, are you still there? Huh? Honey, where is that travel itinerary? Oh, and bring me my antacids. You know how I always feel sick to my stomach before traveling.

5:07 p.m. October 27, 2006

New Mexico Democratic Party Chairman, John Wertheim, held a press conference today in front of the Bernalillo County Courthouse, in which he stated:

I'm glad the good Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, released this transcript today. People were beginning to lose focus. Too much emphasis was being placed on the indictments against my good friend and a New Mexico treasure, former State Senator and fired Highlands University President, Manny Aragon. So, what if former Senator Aragon took a little bit of money for himself. He worked tirelessly handing out New Mexico taxpayers' money to his friends for years. Is it really a crime that he should finally keep a bit for himself? Do you realize that our state legislators don't get paid?

No, what's really important is the total disregard Senator Pete Domenici showed when he violated U.S. Attorney David Iglesias in his own home and emasculated him in the presence of his wife.

The transcripts clearly show that the Senator doesn't understand that the work day ends at 5:00 p.m. Maybe back in the old days people put in long hours, but this is the 21st century, and we have rights. The U.S. Attorney is not a greeter at Walmart. He doesn't even get overtime. No, my friends, Senator Pete Domenici stepped over the line, and showed little regard for David Iglesias.

The transcripts clearly showed that the Senator did not even once ask David how long he would be gone? He didn't even think to ask if he should send someone to check on David's house while he was traveling. He didn't even have the courtesy to say goodbye before ending the conversation.

Let us not lose sight of what it truly important. Another New Mexico kickback scandal is nothing compared to a Senator who answers the phone when his constituents call and then proceeds to take action. Senator Domenici set a very dangerous precedent here for all New Mexico politicians.

In fact, I have it on good authority, that in 35 years of service, Senator Pete has never even taken a kickback. No, this cannot go on. We must unite and take back this U.S. Senate seat. In the name of Manny Aragon, Michael Montoya and Robert Vigil, our future, the future of the Democratic Party of New Mexico, depends on it.

Stay tuned for more on this developing story.