What a Tangled Web He Weaves

If only saying it so, really made it so:

How much did the R's outspend the D's on in last year's nail biter between Rep. Heather Wilson and Dem Patricia Madrid? According to a report from an UNM professor writing in the new publication, Capitol Report, Wilson's side outspent Madrid by about $1.4 million.

"..When we consider total spending--parties, the candidates, and interest groups..Wilson outspent Madrid supporters. Total GOP and ally spending amounted to $6.577 million and Democratic and ally spending amounted to $5.199 million."

That jives with our reporting and, I think, sets the record straight for Wilson operatives who said Madrid had it wrong when she told us in a recent interview that Heather had outspent her.

Sorry, Mr. Monahan, think again. That does not jive with your original reporting. Since you seem to have a problem recalling your original analysis on the diference between Heather Wilson and Patricia Madrid's campaign spending, please allow me to refresh your memory, this is what you originally reported:

"I know you and others believe my debate performance was the reason for the loss. That was a factor, but she outspent me by at least several million dollars--maybe more when you count all the independent expenditures. She began the negative attacks in July and did not let up. That spending was as big a reason as any for the defeat," reflected Madrid who in the sole TV debate with Wilson froze before the camera in a moment that is now frozen in state political history.

I admit I took exception at the time for a very simple reason:

According to Political Moneyline Patricia Madrid's campaign spent just shy of $3.4 million, and Congresswoman Heather Wilson spent $4.8 million. That's a difference of $1.4 million - not exactly "several million."

Hmm, that's interesting. The $1.4 million number I reported is the EXACT SAME NUMBER that UNM Professor, Lonna Atkeson, came up with in her article for the newly launched Capital Report - again a long way from the originally reported "several million" dollar difference. It is unclear if Dr. Atkeson considered the following in arriving at her number:

1. Patricia Madrid started to shamelessly using taxpayer money as early March 2005 for self promotion and to improve name identification - a practice she continued to within 70 days of the election.
   
   
2. The millions that Governor Bill Richardson spent on the 2006 election. In a Santa Fe New Mexican article it was reported, "Madrid has Gov. Bill Richardson, a fellow Democrat, on her side. Richardson has already told the national press -- which he may need to cultivate further should he run for president -- that Madrid will win narrowly, in part due to his get-out-the-vote operation in New Mexico

If not, then factoring in those expenditures rapidly shrinks that $1.4 million gap. Of course, probably the most damning for Mr. Monahan is not his twisted version of the truth for a second time, but what he chose not to report from Dr. Atkeson's article. Namely, the conclusion:

This suggests a possible alternative reason [that Patricia Madrid lost]: Democrats did not mobilize enough Democratic voters who vote Democratic. In part, this analysis suggests that the Democratic strategy is problematic because many Democratic groups tend to focus on aggregate areas and not individual voters, and in doing so concede some areas to the GOP.

But, I guess Joe Monahan wouldn't want to bite the hand that feeds him.

The Latest Train Numbers

It's been awhile since Governor Richardson's train to nowhere has been in the news. But, I thought you might find this interesting:

The $400 million budget for the Albuquerque-to-Santa Fe phase of the Rail Runner project is also still partially unfunded. Congress promised to contribute $75 million, but the state hasn’t yet received the money. Because of the delay, Richardson asked lawmakers during the last legislative session to set aside $35 million for the project. At the time, his spokesman said the governor would make up the other $40 million next year.

In the Albuquerque area, the trains have carried more than 360,000 riders since the service began in July 2006.

The good news is that we're not yet at the $1.3 billion I projected in December of 2005. The bad news is that the $400 million price tag for this latest portion is rapidly approaching double what was originally pitched for this segment, and I'm willing to bet it will be more when all is said and done.

And, I ought to add a little perspective here... Some of you might be pretty darn excited about that "360,000 riders" since July of 2006. That is until you take a look at the traffic flow map of the Greater Albuquerque area and realize that over 170,000 people are driving just one small section of the Big I in a single day!

Between 2000 and 2002, $293 million was spent on the Big I construction, which included the construction of 45 new bridges and 111 miles of road reconstruction, to accommodate 300,000 vehicles per day. Compare that to the rapidly approaching $1 billion in costs of Governor Richardson's train to serve 360,000 people over nearly a year.

Oh, and it is significant to note that the Big I roadway project actually came in under budget. When was the last time you heard of anything done by the Richardson administration coming in under budget? The answer is quite possibly never.

Maybe We Should Define Perjury

Well, here's a question....

If a sharp legal mind, the kind of mind that was portrayed on the silver screen in A Few Good Men, answers a question one way under oath in front of Congress, and answers a question another way when asked by a reporter, does that constitute perjury?

I'm just kind of wondering. You see, I'm not a lawyer, but from a layman's perspective, it sure seems that David Iglesias' well-rehearsed and dramatically delivered testimony before Congress might now come back to bite him. In case you missed, it the first time, here is the re-run of the relevant part:



Go ahead, play it again. It's pretty clear isn't it? Mr. Iglesias said he felt pressured after receiving a call from Senator Domenici. So, maybe Mr. Iglesias can explain this response in a recent interview with his old work buddy and fellow attorney, Jim Scarantino, for the Alibi. First, we have this admission from David Iglesias:

Could [Senator Domenici's] phone call to me [concerning the timing of charges in the court house corruption investigation] constitute a criminal offense? I’m not sure. I suspect ethics charges are more likely than criminal charges as I doubt he called me to interfere with the courthouse cases. Having me removed for not prosecuting voter fraud cases or [not] prosecuting cases fast enough probably does not constitute obstruction of justice.

That's followed up by this whopper of a confession:

Domenici and [U.S. Rep. Heather] Wilson never directly pressured me to take action—it was the New Mexico GOP.

Whoa, hold the presses! Domenici and Wilson never directly pressured him? Well, then how does he explain his sworn testimony before Senator Schumer? David Iglesias clearly stated, "I felt pressured to get these matters moving." He said it regarding Senator Pete Domenici, and Iglesias said it again when asked about a call from Congresswoman Heather Wilson:




Hmm, I wonder if this might negatively impact that book deal?

Medal of Honor Recipient Deserves Respect

It's not often that I blog during work hours. After all, a guy has to make a living. But I just came across something that is probably one of the most offensive partisan acts I've seen come out of Congress in a long time.

Take a moment and watch the video that shows the floor discussion between the Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Veterans’Affairs, Bob Filner (D-California) and the ranking Republican, Steve Buyer (R-Indiana):



Naming the VA Medical Center in Albuquerque after New Mexico war hero and Medal of Honor recipient, Raymond G. 'Jerry' Murphy, was a bipartisan recommendation that enjoys the support of the entire New Mexico Congressional delegation. In fact, you can view the original press release in its entirety on Senator Jeff Bingaman's website. But, in a nutshell, this is the type of man we are talking about:

"Jerry Murphy was a true American hero who in war and peace dedicated himself to others. I am proud to have known Jerry and to have been able to call him my friend. It is a privilege to play a part in bestowing this deserving honor on a great man and a great American," Domenici said. "I will work with our House counterparts to get this bill passed and enacted as soon as possible."

"Jerry Murphy bravely served our country. While he was recognized during his life with a much-deserved Medal of Honor, we are now a step closer to ensuring that the memory of his service to our country—and his fellow veterans—will live on," Bingaman said.

So, why isn't this bill, which incidentally has the support of the VA Department as well as the New Mexico Department of Veterans' Services, Albuquerque Armed Forces Advisory Association, American Legion, American Veterans, Veterans of Foreign Wars, Military Order of the Purple Heart and the Vietnam Veterans of America, being heard.

A very simple and offensive answer: "Companion legislation (HR.474) was introduced in the House by Representative Heather Wilson."

That's right, the Democrat leadership in Congress is willing to insult this Medal of Honor recipient's memory rather than let the legislation be carried forth by a Republican they so badly want to see defeated.

This is wrong. There are no two ways about it. This is wrong.

Equal Opportunity Offender

Folks on the left and on the right are taking note of the creative liberties taken by Sridhar Pappu, a reporter - and I use that term loosely - for the Washington Post.

Here are a few of my favorite excerpts:

At 9 a.m. on the very edge of the dusty, desolate collection of adobe homes and Vietnamese restaurants that seem to form this city, David Iglesias begins his run through the foothills of the Sandia Mountains.

Ok, that is without a doubt one of the most bizarre descriptions I've ever heard of Albuquerque. But, Mr. Pappu's creativity only improves as the story continues:

Back home, [David Iglesias] told his wife, Cyndy, and his shock became hers. For weeks she sat with him in their backyard hot tub, trying to retrace the steps.

And here I thought it was inadvisable to sit in a hot tub for more than ten minutes. Imagine it, these folks sat for weeks in their backyard hot tub. This might very well explain the hallucinations Mr. Iglesias has seemingly begun to endure. Weeks in a hot tub undoubtedly affects not only the skin, but the mind.

Now a "disaffected Republican," Iglesias continues to support all the articles of modern Republican faith.

"Republican faith?" Whoa, when did this become a religion? Does this mean that my contributions are now deductible as a charitable contribution?

But, my favorite part of this whole story is:

"I've seen how Democrats have really reached out and helped me," Iglesias says. "This whole scandal has really made me appreciate different people more. The people who stuck it to me are people who share [the same values]. The people who have helped me -- the Schumers, the Leahys, the Feinsteins -- have value systems different than mine."

No Mr. Iglesias, I'd say those people have value systems very much like yours.

Very Troubling Indeed

I wrote about Mayor Martin Chavez's proposed tax cut a little more than a month ago. I caught some flack from my friends at Rio Grande Foundation for not being a Chavez cheerleader on this one. However, I thought I had made my support for the tax cut very clear:

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.

Well, last night the Albuquerque City Council voted (subscription), and here is the result:

City councilors late Monday night approved a tax cut proposed by Mayor Martin Chávez, but they delayed it for six months to help provide the county with $9 million for jail expenses.

The eighth-cent reduction in gross-receipts taxes will take effect on July 1, 2008. Chávez wanted to cut taxes Jan. 1.

Craig Loy, Sally Mayer, Ken Sanchez and Brad Winter voted against delaying the tax reduction. Voting to delay were Isaac Benton, Michael Cadigan, Don Harris, Martin Heinrich and Debbie O'Malley.

Houston, we have a problem. It seems one Republican thought it was okay to keep on spending money the City shouldn't have had in the first place. Worse, he tried to portray delaying a tax cut as an act of defiance:

[Don] Harris, the council's budget chairman, said the approved plan was "far superior" to the mayor's budget proposal.

"We are doing our job. Our job is not to rubber-stamp whatever the mayor wants to do," Harris said.

Note to Councilor Harris... Republicans ARE NOT going to look kindly on a city councilor who refused to give taxpayers back $9 million. You can't say I didn't warn you back in April. There are places to make a stand, but standing in the way of a tax cut is not one of them.

Governor Richardson is Spinning Tales

Every politician seems to tell them. Stories involving an intimate moment with a constituent that motivated them to take action. And, apparently Governor Bill Richardson is no exception:

On the campaign trail, presidential hopeful Bill Richardson tells a moving story about a New Mexico Marine killed in Iraq and his mom. But is it true?

Three years ago, Richardson attended a memorial service for Lance Cpl. Aaron Austin, 21, who died in April 2004. As he campaigns for the Democratic nomination, the New Mexico governor often recounts an emotional conversation with Austin's mother, saying she thanked him for the federal death benefits she had received and even showed him the government check.

Of course, in Richardson's case, there is one slight hiccup:

But that's not what bothers the Marine's mother, De'on Miller, of Lovington, N.M., who says the conversation about money never took place.

"I didn't exchange words at all with the governor there except when he gave me the flag. And those few words - whatever was exchanged when he handed me the flag and the Spirit of New Mexico award - certainly had nothing to do with money," she said Thursday in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.

Now who are we supposed to believe here - the Governor of the State of New Mexico and Democratic candidate for President, or the Marine's mom? Based on Bill Richardson's story telling history, smart money backs the mom.

An Interesting Observation

Ok, I'm going to let you in on a little secret. One of the ways I keep track on certain politicos in New Mexico is through Google Alerts. I have a gmail account associated with this blog, and the news alerts all are fed into that gmail account.

Now, here comes the interesting part... the Republican candidates for President, who seem to be putting significant resources into search engine marketing, are John McCain and Newt Gingrich. Their sponsored ads are the ones that show up next to almost every post that has to do with politics - McCain's more than Gingrich's.

As an advertising professional, I can tell you this is a smart move on the part of the McCain camp. I'm not sure why the other candidates, or at least those with money, are not doing the same. My guess is that they are buying keywords, if not they're INCREDIBLY foolish, but they are not buying them broad enough.

My advertising company actually provides Search Engine Optimization (SEO), both of the organic and paid varieties, for several clients, and I have to tell you, these other campaigns are missing the boat in a big way. It is one of the least expensive ways to reach those in your target demographic. When it comes to politics, I'm a case in point.

The Facts Are on His Side

You may not like what Palast has to say but the facts are on his side.

This was in a comment by David Jacobs left yesterday. Now, Mr. Jacobs is a frequent commentator on this blog, and I sincerely appreciate the dialogue. But, to argue that Mr. Palast has facts on his side is a bit of a stretch. Granted, Mr. Palast can spin the facts with the best of them, and like our own Joe Monahan, he pretends to be reporting the facts in an unbiased investigative manner, but nothing could be further from the truth.

It may surprise some people to know that I actually own one of Mr. Palast's book, The Best Money Democracy Can Buy. However, it was a New York Times best seller on politics, and I am always curious what the other side is putting out there.

Here is what I discovered... If you are removed from the facts (i.e. don't have first hand knowledge), then Mr. Palast's "investigative reporting" is very believable. However, if you are living what he is reporting, then it quickly becomes clear for what it is... Democratic Spin.

Case in point can be found in this exchange from the David Iglesias segment on Democracy NOW:

AMY GOODMAN: And Healther Wilson, of course, also called, and Heather Wilson at the time in an extremely close race for her political life as a congress member from New Mexico.

GREG PALAST: Well, in fact, from my investigation, she didn't win. There was voter fraud, and that the majority of the votes went to the Democrats.

Do you hear that sound? It is the sound of the last of Mr. Palast's credibility going down the drain. Anyone who is going to go on record stating that Republicans are in a position to steal an election in the NM's 1st CD is either a fool or the ultimate spinmeister. Since I don't think fools can write a NYT best seller, I'm going to acknowledge Mr. Palast's tremendous spin abilities.

One of my very first posts as a political blogger pointed out the absurdity of claims that Republicans could steal elections in New Mexico, and in the 2006 elections in the Land of Enchantment the same reality existed as in 2004. The same powerful Democrats were in all of the same election controlling positions, so the absurdity of the premise remains the same.

You Can Handle the Truth - Right?

Dear Mr. Iglesias:

I read in a recent article that, in addition to spending time mowing your lawn, you have a couple of other interesting activities to fill your days:

Besides [shuttling his daughters to and from school and their various activities, Iglesias] goes jogging in the Foothills, fields calls from reporters, reads a few blogs and tries to spend a little time each day by the bubbling rock.

I''ve noticed that one of those "reporters" you've been spending time on the phone with is Greg Palast, and I'm concerned that maybe someone failed to make you aware the Greg Palast is basically a writer who makes his money peddling conspiracy theory books to further the agenda of the far left. This could become problematic for you as I know you are struggling against those who have portrayed you as a poster boy of the far left:

Whitney Cheshire, a former spokeswoman for the New Mexico GOP, has used her blog to call Iglesias a "poster child" for the Democrats and question what kind of reward he'll get for his statements.

Iglesias says he's been approached by envoys for two prominent Democrats - one on the state level and another on the national stage. He won't say who, and says he doesn't know what they wanted because he rebuffed the entreaties.

"I told them I'm not interested," he says. "I'm not a Democratic stooge."

See, this is a problem. I'm truly afraid that someone is going to question your sincerity. Some may find it difficult to take you at your word regarding that whole "Democratic stooge" thing while you are willing actor in Democratic productions such as this one by Democracy NOW delivering lines like this:

DAVID IGLESIAS: I had no idea that a few local yokels in New Mexico would have enough stroke to get the President to complain.

Mr. Iglesias, we all know that Senator Pete Domenici began complaining about your unwillingness to prosecute voter fraud in New Mexicoin September of 2005 . And, it has been well documented that this led to his asking for your replacement. However, for you to call New Mexico's senior Senator, a "local yokel" is, well, something that could be portrayed as the act of a Democratic stooge.

But, no worries. I've decided to help you set the record straight. I don't want people to start labeling David Iglesias as "a man who can't handle the truth." So, you might have noticed that I'm having a little bit of trouble getting some answers from the Department of Justice to my FOIA requests. Their unwillingness to release documents about you is only going to reinforce the rumors that you can't handle the truth.

However, together, you and I, can prove once and for all that David Iglesias CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH. Just take a moment and write up a little note authorizing the Department of Justice to release all of the information I requested in my intitial FOIA request. I'll be happy to swing by and pick up a notarized copy at your earliest convenience.

In pursuit of the truth,

Mario

How to Get Your Party Funded

I've got a couple more notes on the taxpayer funded World Peace Conference. According to Jay Miller, there isn't a whole lot of that peaceful easy feeling being associated with this $420,000 event:

The problem with a government-sponsored peace conference is that the state doesn't have a position on peace so who knows what to do at a conference?

The Legislature, which appropriated $420,000 for the gathering, finally decided the focus would be peace tourism, so the Department of Tourism was given the responsibility of planning it. We're spending a lot of money on space tourism, why not peace tourism too?

No one thought much of that idea or could do much with it. So the folks at Tourism brought in some peace professionals. Yes, there are such things.

But that didn't set well with New Mexico's many home-grown peace groups, which had been working on that mission for years. Why hadn't they been involved, they asked?

Hmm, $420,000 appropriated by the Legislature, but the State Tourism Board says they are staying under the $280,000 budget. I wonder where that extra $140,000 is being spent?

And speaking of appropriations, it took a little digging, but you'll never believe where this money came from. You see, a bill was carried by State Senator Shannon Robinson (D) for this very important peace building event, but it died. However, no worries, this is after all New Mexico, and where there is a will there is a way.

According to legislative sources, the money for this event came out of 2006 capital outlay fund. That's right, the money that is supposed to be used for building roads and repairing schools was instead set aside in during the 2006 Legislative Session for a peace conference. You might remember that 2006 was the year in which Governor Bill Richardson vetoed much needed capital outlay for our schools.

Yet, he let $420,000 of capital outlay be earmarked for this exclusive Santa Fe party.

Maybe since Ballantines PR, the Los Angeles based boutique PR agency that is running this conference, billed it as "Building a Culture of Peace," Governor Richardson thought it would be okay to use capital outlay. After all, it does have the word "building" in its title.

New Mexico Funds World Peace

Doesn't it just make you feel warm and fuzzy all over? It's good to know that our state has so much money to burn that we are able to use it in such a constructive manner:

More than 400 people will attend the sold-out World Peace Conference this week to listen to speeches from Nobel Peace laureates and participate in five "peace councils.''

The conference, dubbed "Building a Culture of Peace,'' is scheduled for Wednesday and Thursday at the Hilton Santa Fe. Although registration for the conference is full, a limited number of tickets will be available at the door beginning at 8 a.m. Wednesday for $65.

Tickets remain available for a concert Thursday by the Indigo Girls and Richie Havens at the Santa Fe Opera, with prices ranging from $20 to $49.

State Tourism Secretary Michael Cerletti said he hopes the conference will spur participants to talk about ways of achieving peace. "What we're trying to do here is create a dialogue,'' Cerletti said.

The state Tourism Department organized the event, and Cerletti said the conference should stay well under its budget of $280,000 in state funds.

Anyone here doing the math? $280,000 divided by the 400 attendees means the taxpayers have ponied up to cover the cost for this event at a whopping $700 per attendee. That's one expensive dialogue.

In other news (subscription):

Tax breaks for people who buy affordable housing in Santa Fe County have disappeared under the new county assessor, Domingo Martinez.

Martinez, the former New Mexico state auditor who was elected assessor last November, said in an interview that the tax breaks given on affordable homes by his predecessor, Benito Martinez, were illegal under the state tax code.

Meanwhile, property tax bills have arrived in mailboxes and affordable housing officials say Domingo Martinez's new way of doing things could seriously hurt low-income residents who have purchased homes through city and county affordable housing programs.

Mike Loftin, executive director of Homewise, a non-profit that helps administer affordable housing programs, said tax bills for those who have purchased affordable homes could go up from $20 to $60 a month.

Daniel Werwath, of the Santa Fe Community Housing Trust, said calls have been flooding in from clients whose bills have risen steeply from last year. In one extreme case, Werwath said, an elderly, disabled woman on a fixed income saw her property tax bill rise from roughly $50 a month to more than $200 a month.

"These are people with extremely low incomes. It's a huge issue," Werwath said.

I wonder if the elderly disabled woman on a fixed income will get recognized as a sponsor at the World Peace Conference event.

Last Night Turned Into This Morning

To those who came back to check before going to bed, "Sorry." The day flew by, and by the time I got home from work it was after midnight, and I was beat. Of course, I'm running late this morning for a breakfast meeting, so let me just address the David Iglesias FOIA responses received to date.

It seems that Department of Justice (DOJ) has determined that the easiest way to address my request is one item at a time. I'll give you the original question and the response below:

Q4: 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?

A4: A request must describe the records sought in sufficient detail to allow location of the records with a reasonable amount of effort (i.e., processing the request should not require an unduly burdenson effort or be disruptive of Department operations). Please provide more specific information about the records you seek, such as appropriate dates, locations, names, natures of the records, etc.

Ok, let's consider this a group exercise. If someone would be so kind as to provide me the exact dates of the Vigil trial, I will happily re-submit my request.

Q14: Please produce the name of any USA that has ever been appointed outside of the current political/constitutional process for the appointments of USAs.

A14: The Freedom of Information Act only applies to records already in existence and does not require an agency to conduct research, create new records, or answer questions presented as FOIA requests.

Hmm, it doesn't look like I'm going to get an answer to this one.

Q3: Letter(s) signed by Assistant United States Attorneys concerning Mr. Iglesias’ foreign travels, management or other perceived shortcomings.

A3: It is the policy of the Executive Office neither to confirm or deny that records concerning living third parties exist. Further, any release to you of such records, if they do exist, would be in violation of the Privacy Act 5 U.S.C. § 552a. The requested material would also be exempt from release pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6) and/or (b)(7)(C) which pertain to records whose disclosure would result in an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

Now, this response did also include an outline for an appeal to this ruling. So, if one of you legal begals that read this blog religiously would like to step up and help guide me on how best to respond in the name of the public good, I would be much obliged.

The next set of questions was lumped together as a third party request:

Q5: 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.

Q7: 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?

Q9: 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.

Q10: 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.

Q12: Copies of all of Iglesias’ emails received from, or sent to, members of the public.

A5,7,9,10,12: You have request records concerning a thrid party (or third parties). records pertaining to a third party generally cannot be released absent express authorization and consent of the third party, blah, blah, blah.

So, that's where we stand to date.

More to Come

I just got back into town last night after spending three days in Atlanta with a client at the Waste Expo. I've got a bunch of mail to go through including three envelopes from the DOJ regarding my FOIA request, and a City of Albuquerque Notice of Violation Fixed Speed - looks like I'll be able to take an inside look at how this new money making scheme works.

Unfortunately, I've got a meeting packed morning, so I'll have to wait until tonight to write in detail about these and other topics. Make sure to come back and visit before you got to bed.

A Bad Precedent

A follow up to my last post as reported in today's Albuquerque Journal (subscription):

Voters were supposed to decide last November whether to renew the open-space tax, which amounts to about $8 a year on a $100,000 home. The tax had been approved at the polls in 1998 and 2000 but expires this year.

County administrators, however, forgot to put renewal of the tax on the Nov. 7 ballot last year.

The commission's vote Tuesday imposes the tax at a reduced rate. It will now amount to $3 a year on a home valued at $100,000 and will generate about $1.1 million a year. The existing tax has been generating around $2.5 million a year.

It will remain in place until it can be put before voters in November 2008, county officials said.

Voting in favor of the budget package, which included the tax, were commissioners Alan Armijo, Tim Cummins, Teresa Córdova and Deanna Archuleta.

Michael Brasher voted against it. He said he had questions about whether the county had solicited public comment in developing the budget.

Brasher also said he had concerns about whether the tax is needed immediately, as the county's open-space fund already has a balance of about $9 million available.

Is Michael Brasher the only sane voice on the Commission? I believe the answer is a resounding, "YES."

Just a Little Too Convenient

It wasn't that long ago that the City of Albuquerque tried to sneak a tax past unsuspecting Albuquerqueans. Unfortunately for the city, an uproar ensued, and the sleight of hand met a much warranted timely demise.

Apparently, some members of the Bernalillo County Commission learned nothing (subscription) from the Albuquerque experience:

Bernalillo County commissioners this week will consider imposing an open-space tax to help make up for a proposal left off the ballot last year.

Voters in November were supposed to decide whether to continue a tax to fund the acquisition and maintenance of open-space lands, but the question wasn't included on the ballot— the result of an "administrative error," a spokeswoman said.

The property tax generates about $2 million a year and amounts to around $8 a year on a $100,000 home. Voters approved the tax in 1998 and 2000, but it's set to expire this summer.

The county is now considering whether to enact an open-space tax without voter approval.

The proposal would impose a tax smaller than what has been in place. It would amount to around $3 a year for a $100,000 home and generate $1 million annually.

If county commissioners take no action— or reject the latest proposal— revenue from the existing tax will dry up this summer.

County Commission Chairman Alan Armijo said he plans to support the tax measure.

On second thought, this is worse than the sleight of hand that the city tried to pull. Commissioner Alan Armijo actually wants us to reward incompetence with a tax increase. But, that's not the most offensive part. This is:

The tax proposal isn't as big as what's been in place because the county wants to start small for now and "look at a bigger package in the future," Armijo said.

I believe in the used car business this is known as the bait and switch.

Just Keeps Nagging at Me

I tried to ignore it. Really, I did. I read it yesterday, and thought, "Just forget about it. You just said something nice about the guy the day before, so let it lie." But, I can't. It just keeps nagging at me. After all, I have a civic duty to call it for what it is, right? Well, here it is. What's bugging me is this from Democratic blogger and Patricia Madrid booster, Joe Monahan:

It was the first time I had spoken with Madrid since her November defeat. As one would expect from a political pro who has been through the grinder, she showed not a hint of bitterness or remorse over her cliffhanger loss to Heather and reacted dispassionately when asked for analysis.

"I know you and others believe my debate performance was the reason for the loss. That was a factor, but she outspent me by at least several million dollars--maybe more when you count all the independent expenditures. She began the negative attacks in July and did not let up. That spending was as big a reason as any for the defeat," reflected Madrid who in the sole TV debate with Wilson froze before the camera in a moment that is now frozen in state political history.

Ok folks, time for a reality check. Let's talk about Ms. Madrid's campaign being outspent by millions.

1. Patricia Madrid started to shamelessly using taxpayer money as early March 2005 for self promotion and to improve name identification - a practice she continued to within 70 days of the election.
2. According to Political Moneyline Patricia Madrid's campaign spent just shy of $3.4 million, and Congresswoman Heather Wilson spent $4.8 million. That's a difference of $1.4 million - not exactly "several million."
3. And, who can forget the additional $2.1 million that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee spent on an eight week television buy to benefit Patricia Madrid.
4. Now throw into the mix the millions that Governor Bill Richardson spent on the 2006 election. In a Santa Fe New Mexican article it was reported, "Madrid has Gov. Bill Richardson, a fellow Democrat, on her side. Richardson has already told the national press -- which he may need to cultivate further should he run for president -- that Madrid will win narrowly, in part due to his get-out-the-vote operation in New Mexico."

The bottom line here is that Patricia Madrid WAS NOT outspent. In fact, she may very well have outspent Congresswoman Heather Wilson. And, let's not forget that back in 1998 a certain Mr. Maloof outspent Heather Wilson by about $6 million, yet we didn't end up with a Congressman Maloof.

So, what's really bugging me? Is it Patricia Madrid's assertions? No, she needs to rationalize her loss, and that's just a part of the human condition. It helps people move on with their lives. No, what's really bugging me is that a political veteran like Joe Monahan is aware of all of the spending information, and yet gave Madrid a free ride on her ridiculous statement. Had it been a Republican making that statement, he would have been all over it. Instead, he let it go. Once again demonstrating a clear bias - especially, when it comes to Congresswoman Heather Wilson.

Now before some of you start leaving comments about my bias when it comes to Heather Wilson, let me just say it. I'm a HUGE supporter of Heather Wilson. I think she's GREAT. But, see that's one big difference between myself and Mr. Monahan. I don't try and portray myself to be something that I'm not. Mr. Monahan may have a certain Santa Fe County Sheriff fooled into thinking he's a "truthful" blogger, but the rest of us know better.

Losing Them One at a Time

Poor Governor Bill Richardson seems to be losing the vote, one independent voter at a time:

Of all the candidates running for the Democratic Presidential nomination, Bill Richardson always seemed to be the most plausible choice. Certainly, he was the only one for whom I thought I could vote. Well, that’s gone.

Two years ago, Governor Richardson proved himself not ready for prime time. And, it seems like that's still the case today.

David Iglesias' Performance

Finally, New Mexico's left of center blogger political blogger, Joe Monahan characterizes the David Iglesias media tour for what it is: a "performance."

As you an see in this tape, Iglesias' performance is getting more polished as he continues the drumbeat that is damaging the eardrums of two of our state's most prominent R's. He is also more precise in detailing why he believes he was wrongfully fired at the urging of Pete and his fellow R's.

And let's not forget the bottom line here:

This is the tightest explanation I have seen from Iglesias. It's important politically because the charges, if they are to be effectively used against Domenici and Wilson next year in short paid media ads, will have to make sense to a general audience. Iglesias has honed his message and in doing so is laying the groundwork for the Dem consultants who will ultimately market this story to the electorate.

Kinda makes you think, doesn't it? After all, the truth does not have to get honed. A truthful story is the same every time it is told. It DOES NOT go through redrafts and "honing" to better fit a 30 second attack ad.