Public Perceptions

I've posted on more than one occasion that I don't support the creation of an ethics commission to advise legislators and state employees to behave ethically. I'm a firm believer that folks in our state and local governments know precisely what they are doing when they behave unethically. Rather than spend money on creating another government entity, I think we ought to vote the unethical out of office and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law those that act illegally.

I thought the recent article by the Albuquerque Journal on the paid lobbying marketing practices of soon to be retiring Senator Joe Cararro somewhat ironic (subscription):

Carraro said in his deposition that he became interested in artificial turf in 2003 as a water-saving alternative and that, over the next few years, met Wickens and became familiar with Real Turf's product.

He said that, prior to being hired by Real Turf, he sought state money for artificial turf at the Paradise Hills ballfields. Real Turf got that job.

He said that he met Wickens in about the spring of 2004 and that Wickens frequently sought his advice on business matters over the following year.

Carraro said he eventually told Wickens he was going to have to start paying him and, in May 2005, he sent Wickens a letter that he called a contract proposal.
Carraro said his company, Public Perceptions, would provide marketing and business consulting services in exchange for the $5,000-a-month fee.

The letter also said there was "not a direct relationship" between Carraro's position as a senator and services Public Perceptions would provide.

Carraro also wrote that Public Perceptions wouldn't be involved with any government entity on Real Turf's behalf.

"There can never be a real or perceived conflict of interest regarding my positions as a state senator and president of Public Perceptions," he said, adding:

"Specifically, it should be noted that recommendations of your product to governmental entities given prior to this contract ... in no way bound you to the employment of Public Perceptions."

In his deposition, Carraro said his work for Real Turf included meeting with Wickens and other managers, reviewing management job descriptions, providing advice on marketing, writing advertisements and working on printed publications.
"I ... analyzed their business, figured out ways for them to make more money," he said.

Carraro said he stopped working for Real Turf because the company quit paying him. He also said he had become frustrated with Wickens' failure to implement many of his suggestions.

It sure would seem to that Senator Joe Cararro took great pains to leave a paper trail that would give the appearance that everything was on the up and up. Of course, it's not surprising that a State Senator who has spent twenty years in the system knows how to work the system. So, what makes Senator Cararro's antics ironic?

“We’ve all got our special interests we have to represent,” Carraro says. “My special interest is the little guy [Particularly, the little guy who is willing to spend $5,000 a month on consulting services] . But this is a big guy, big business, big interest state, and they come down here and make us vote the way they do. The poor of this state are going to stay poor because they don’t have lobbyists looking out for them.”

Carraro, who ran unsuccessfully last June in the Republican primary for US Senate, cites economist Milton Friedman and activist Cesar Chavez while comparing state politics to Orwell’s Animal Farm: “We’re all equal, but some of us are more equal than others.”

It would be an impressive oration if anyone was actually listening. But most of the senators have long since tuned Carraro out. Some fiddle with their laptops. Others talk on cell phones. Stuart Ingle, R-Roosevelt, chats with a colleague a few feet away from where Carraro is standing with the microphone. Mary Jane Garcia, D-Doña Ana, appears to be eating sunflower seeds. John Pinto, D-McKinley, appears to be fading in and out of consciousness.

Considering that legislators get to know each other pretty well, it's probably not surprising that Senator Carraro's colleagues opted to tune him out when he was putting on airs maligning registered lobbyist while taking money for.... uh, "marketing" services.

We Don't Need an Ethics Commission

Why is it the left always wants a government solution to a government problem?

Eli Lee on Clearly New Mexico answers why we need an independent state ethics commission. Shorter Eli: Manny Aragon.

Indeed, are we to believe that since 1992 not one member of the Legislature has had a conflict of interest or used influence inappropriately? Must questions of misconduct rise to the level of a state or federal indictment and prosecution before they are addressed?

We have a solution - a citizen driven, a personal responsibility solution. It's called elections. Every two or four years we have an opportunity to dump the riff-raff. Regardless, of the power an individual legislator may have hold in Santa Fe, they can be beat by a superior candidate.

Of course, people have to care enough to vote. And, people who are not going to be defined by holding an elected office need to run.

A Man Who Knows About Monarchies

Governor Bill Richardson and Clinton strategist James Carville appear to have had an entertaining little debate on Larry King. This is by far my favorite part of the exchange (subscription):

Richardson told King that he believes Clinton was too negative during her quest to win Pennsylvania.

There's a sense of "clinging to the throne," Richardson said, clearly referring to the Clinton camp. "You know, we're America, we're not Monaco."

This coming from a man who has made a habit of tossing aside the New Mexico Constitution when it suits his needs. I hope during the next legislative session our legislators take time to remind the Governor that "You know, we're America, we're not Monaco." After all, they don't call him King Bill for nothing.

Governor Loses in a Showdown

The Senate showed during the last legislative session that it had a backbone, and it looks like that just may be a contagious condition around the Roundhouse (subscription):

Sen. Linda Lopez, D-Albuquerque, put it more diplomatically.

"The governor was gone for a year. And things in our state have changed in a year," she said.

"He can't run for re-election. For some people, that is a factor— lame-duck governor."

House Minority Whip Dan Foley, R-Roswell, said he has noticed a change this year in legislators' attitude toward Richardson.

"There seems to be many more Democrats standing up (to Richardson) this year," Foley said.

Signs of legislative independence are abundant.

Apparently, backbones among legislators is not something Governor Bill Richardson finds particularly enamoring. Or, maybe he just didn't like reading a headline in the state's largest paper that screamed, "Is Gov. Now A Lame Duck?" The Governor is bent on testing those newly found backbones with threats and challenges (subscription):

Richardson said he would press the Legislature in 2009 to address the employer payment mandate and insurance requirement if lawmakers approve an acceptable health care bill this session.

The governor hinted that he would call a special session if lawmakers fail to make the change he wants for the appointment of the authority's executive director.

"I don't pose veiled threats. I've had special sessions before,'' Richardson said. " And I'd say the odds are, if there is insufficient action on health care reform, there will be a special session.''

Well, I'd say "odds are" if the Governor called a special session when every member of the Legislature is up for re-election, he will unequivocally prove that he is a lame duck Governor. I am confident that Senate, and quite possibly the House, will stick it to him by adjourning sine die just as they have before when the Governor has unreasonably called a special session.

Best Line of the Day

If you haven't been over to the Rio Grande Foundation's blog, Errors of Enchantment, in awhile, you're missing out. Paul gets the award for the best line of the day:

The fact is that governments should not be in the business of molding us into better people. Governments should leave smokers, fat people, couch potatoes, and others alone.

Amen to that!

Visiting Governor Gets His Due

I don't like Governor Richardson's ill-conceived health care proposal. That's probably no surprise to anyone. But, what really irks me lately is Governor Richardson's holier than thou attitude regarding our citizen legislators:

At a news conference just 15 days ago, an upbeat Gov. Bill Richardson repeated two key words for lawmakers as they convened in Santa Fe: health care, health care, health care.

On Wednesday, halfway point for the legislative session, Richardson used the same words — with a much different tone.

"I said before the session that the focus of this 30-day legislative session would be health care, would be health care, and would be health care," he said, "and up until today we saw very little action."

Unfortunately for Richardson's agenda, the only action on his proposal was a vote by a key House committee on Wednesday morning to strip the bill of its mandate to insure all New Mexicans and ship the measure on to its next stop in the Roundhouse.

The governor deemed the move "unacceptable" and called the assembled lawmakers a "do-nothing Legislature, especially on health care."

I've been known to give the legislators a hard time on occasion. Ok, on many occasions. However, I find it more than a bit offensive for the PAID Governor, who has been absent from the state for nearly a year pursuing his delusions of grandeur, to call the men and women who volunteer their time to serve New Mexicans "a do-nothing Legislature" because they don't rubber stamp the most expensive and ill-conceived program of this administration.

New Mexico is facing an impending budget crisis because of the spendathon launched during this Governor's tenure. Mark my words... in 2009 there will be a grab for additional permanent fund dollars to balance the overgrown state budget.

I, for one, am glad our legislators have finally said enough is enough.

Four Billion Reasons Against Universal Health Care

Just like there are consequences in life, there are consequences in government. The spending party never lasts forever. At some point the bill comes and then those spend, spend, spend politicians start looking at new ways to separate you from your hard earned money. But, don't take my word for it. Look at what one reasonable Democratic party leader had to recently say about the state of our state finances:

Tim Jennings warned his audience that he is a blunt speaker.

The president pro tempore of the New Mexico Senate indeed pulled no punches in addressing the attendees at the Association of Commerce and Industry's business day breakfast in Santa Fe.

"We're $4 billion in the hole," Jennings said of the fiscal challenges facing New Mexico. "But luckily we have $360 million in new dollars to solve that, so things are looking up."

$4 Billion in the hole! Ouch, that's not a pretty picture. I would suggest that any reasonable person would say, time to stop the spending. Any bill that is up in the legislature that requires new recurring funding should be dead on arrival.

In his State of the State the Governor said:

Our sound financial management of our permanent funds has allowed us to invest more than $3 billion into New Mexico schools and taxpayers. And I’d like to assure those who opposed the investment into our schools – our permanent funds have grown from $9 billion to $15 billion and our schools are benefiting from that investment.

Anyone want to bet how long it is going to take before some of our folks start planning another raid on that permanent fund? My guess is 2009.

The Railroad to Taxation

The proverbial other shoe is about to drop on the railroad:

The six-member statewide commission sent a letter to the governor this week encouraging establishment of the new transit district, which would let participating counties first elect to be involved, then ask voters to approve up to a 1/2 percent gross-receipts tax to pay for services.

And, "the tax-cutting" Governor has issued a statement supporting it. As the Governor's universal health care proposal continues to be pushed, New Mexicans would be wise to remember that so far every "big" initiative this Governor has put forth has been followed shortly after with a cry for a need for new taxes. We're seeing it with railroad. We saw it with Spaceport America, and we'll see it with the health care proposal.

My biggest fear is that in the very near future, we will see another attempt to raid the permanent fund to pay for all of these unrealistic and poorly planned new entitlement programs.

Broadcasting Should Happen

I'm with Heath on this one. I had written before how wrong it was for Governor Richardson to veto prior efforts to get cameras into the Roundhouse for broadcasting. But, now that the money has been approved and is just waiting to be spent, it is wrong for this not to go into effect.

It is disingenuous for the Legislature to be considering any sort of ethics reform package, when they won't even take this simple first step toward providing more open and accessible government.

Governor in For a Rude Awakening

Governor Richardson has spent a year on the campaign trail only to return a week before the 30 day legislative session with big plans (subscription):

We already know the lawmakers will be asked to tackle health care and ethics reform.

There's a plan to change how the state funds public education.

Granting gay and lesbian couples the same rights as married, heterosexual ones, is a familiar and controversial issue likely to return to the table.

By the way, legislators also must craft a multibillion-dollar state budget and might divvy up more than $300 million for brick-and-mortar projects around the state that are better known as pork.

That's just the big stuff; hundreds of additional issues, with legislators pushing their own priorities, will pile up as everyone tries to address a year's worth of problems and wishes in one month's time.

My prediction is that the lame duck Governor is going to make very little headway during this session on that massive health care proposal. Then, he is going to be faced with calling folks into special session or aligning himself with a presidential campaign and going back out on the trail to try and win the Hispanic vote. My guess is that latter. With all of the legislators up for re-election, a special session would not be well-received.

Richardson Makes First Big Mistake

It didn't even take five minutes for Governor Richardson to make his first big mistake. He's back in New Mexico to make his bail out speech from the Presidential campaign, and one of his first acts is to "snub" New Mexico's political reporters:

Richardson's withdrawal was expected. But one surprise today was how he treated the New Mexico press corps. Before Richardson appeared in the Rotunda, his chief campaign flack Pahl Shipley announced that Richardson would not answer questions after his announcement. That in itself isn't exactly surprising. While I was in Iowa and New Hampshire the past few days, practically the only thing that Richardson spokesman Tom Reynolds ever said to me was "The governor's not taking any questions."

But where did Richardson go immediately after his speech? To the Capitol television studio to do interviews on Fox News and CNN.

Watch Matt Grubbs' report on KOAT -- specifically the last part. You'll see campaign aide Katie Roberts telling local reporters to "please show respect" for the governor as he goes about his "official business."

Official business meaning holing up in the television studio for an hout and a half so he could be on national t.v.

Bad move, Governor. These are the folks you definitely are going to need on your side as you try and thrust a bank breaking HillaryCare type of health insurance mandate on New Mexicans during the short thirty day legislative session.

Of course, I'm not buying the Governor's line that he's "back." The man loves the national press just a little too much for his own good, which means he's got two choices at this point.

1. He goes out on the campaign trail for one of the candidates to head up their Hispanic voter efforts.
2. He becomes a talking head commentator on the presidential campaign for the national media.

I just don't see him staying put here. Especially, not after the dose of reality those in the legislature are about to give him this session.

Beware Regulation Gone Wild

Uh oh, they're at it again. Governor Richardson's appointees are doing his bidding and ignoring the fact that in New Mexico it is the legislature, not appointed regulatory bodies serving at the pleasure of the Governor, that are supposed to create laws:

New Mexico became the first Intermountain state to implement the Clean Car program today after the Environmental Improvement Board voted late last night to approve the regulations that address climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars.

The program, which will become effective Jan. 1, 2008, requires car manufacturers to sell and lease vehicles that meet the standards beginning with model year 2011. The program only applies to new vehicles and will not affect new or used cars sold before that model year.

“The Clean Cars Program is a key part of our state’s effort to reduce global warming emissions to the levels necessary to avoid the worst effects of a warming planet,” said Governor Richardson. “Today’s decision by the Environmental Improvement Board means New Mexico can implement the cleanest standards for vehicle emissions in the country. New Mexico is again taking action, when Washington won’t.”

And there you have it, the Governor's reason for brushing aside the lawmaking process is so that he can have that all important sound bite for his doomed presidential campaign: "New Mexico is again taking action, when Washington won't."

Maybe that has something to do with the fact that the rest of the country is still run like a Democracy?

Regardless of where you stand on the issue of emission standards, you should be troubled by a regulatory body acting in a way that completely eliminates the legislative process. This is a very dangerous slope. The people on this body are not accountable to anyone in New Mexico other than the Governor - and he hasn't spent any significant time in New Mexico in months.

There is no deliberation involved here. There is simply one man dictating the law of the land, and single-handedly changing that law at the witching hour with little to no public input. This is just wrong. You have a Democratic Governor with a Democratic controlled legislature. If this is what is in the best interest of New Mexico, then he should put it on the Legislative agenda for the session and get it passed legally.

Before the environmentalists among you leave comments that support the Governor's mandate over the constitutional process we still have for making laws. Let me put this in another context for you. Let's take an issue like abortion that pretty evenly divides the population. Should a pro-life Governor be able to appoint a regulatory body to regulate abortion?

How supportive would those who are pro-choice react if this body some evening at midnight decided to ban abortion throughout the state? Would you be okay with the pro-life Governor's edict that:

“The Ban Abortions Program is a key part of our state’s effort to reduce the murder of the unborn to avoid the worst effects of a misguided planet,” said Governor Conservative. “Today’s decision by the Life Improvement Board means New Mexico can implement the most stringent standards for protecting the sanctity of life in the country. New Mexico is again taking action, when Washington won’t.”

Like I said, it's a slippery slope.

A Broken Legislative Process

Last week I received an email and a phone call from a reader wanting to discuss my post regarding the government's case in the Metropolitan Courthouse Scandal. Specifically, the reader was troubled by this:

Speaking of unnamed folks in the legislature:

During the 2003 legislative session, Defendant Aragon told a legislative staff member to redirect funds that had been allocated in 1999 to two other projects to the Metropolitan Courthouse for use as additional funding on that project. Defendant Aragon's statements, which caused the redirection of the funds, made additional funds accessible to the members of the conspiracy related to the building of the Metropolitan Courthouse.

Kind of makes you wonder who is this unnamed "legislative staff member" who aided and abetted in defrauding the taxpayers? The 2003 legislative session wasn't that long ago. Is this person still working in the legislature? Are they now assisting other politicians in making "additional funds accessible" for other building conspiracies?

Unfortunately, I was in Washington D.C. with my family last week, so I didn't get to return the phone call for a frank discussion until yesterday. During which time, the reader made a very good point that is worth repeating here. Namely, that "aided and abetted in defrauding taxpayers" may be an unfair way to portray the act of the legislative staff member.

The way this process was explained to me, a legislator (or his/her staff member) asks the legislative staff to draft a change for a reauthorization or insertion of capital outlay into the capital outlay bill. This is done, and it is then voted on by the Legislator. So, charging the legislative staff member with "aiding and abetting " would make as much sense as charging the typist who typed up the change or the courier who delivered the new bill.

So, this brings us back to who has responsibility? Well, the simple answer is that the legislators who voted to approve the 340 page bill and the Governor who signed the bill without questioning the misappropriation of funds share the responsibility.

A quick search of the 2003 Capital Outlay bill, H.B. 200 reveals that "Metropolitan" shows up six times within two pages on the 340 page document. First, money that had previously been appropriated to Indian Pueblo Cultural Center were appropriated to the Metropolitan Courthouse.

But, here is the really disturbing part:

Section 121. MOUNTAIN VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL--CHANGE PURPOSE AND EXTEND EXPENDITURE PERIOD FOR THE METROPOLITAN COURTHOUSE IN BERNALILLO COUNTY.--The balance of proceeds from the sale of severance tax bonds appropriated to the state department of public education pursuant to Subsection T of Section 19 of Chapter 2 of Laws 1999 (1st S.S.) for educational technology at Mountain View elementary school in Albuquerque in Bernalillo county shall not be expended for the original purpose but is reauthorized and appropriated to the Bernalillo county metropolitan court for the purpose of furnishing and equipping the new metropolitan courthouse in Bernalillo county.

That's right, they took money for our kids to line their pockets. And, the kicker to all of this comes from this paragraph taken from Governor Bill Richardson's 2003 State of the State to kickoff the Legisaltive Session:

We cannot achieve our lofty economic and educational goals without first meeting our most basic needs. When I proposed my budget, I set out three basic goals: Better schools, better jobs and more money in the pockets of New Mexicans.

Well, I guess he succeeded in putting more money in the pockets of some New Mexicans.

Taking a Look at The Government's Case

On October 25, 2007, the federal government filed two document notifying their intent to introduce evidence in the Metropolitan Courthouse kickback scandal. If you take a look at the filing, what is most interesting is not who is named, but who is not named as a "co-conspirator."

For example, despite the fact that lobbyists are often portrayed and perceived as evil and corrupting influences in the "wholesome" legislative process, the filing tells a different tale:

During the time that Defendant Michael Murphy was a board member of the Albuquerque Metropolitan Area Flood Control Authority (AMAFCA), he asked a lobbyist to deliver funds to two influential politicians. Defendant Murphy told the lobbyist that his payment from AMAFCA would be increased to pay for the funds that were to go to these two politicians. The total amount of the funds that was to be paid to these two politicians was approximately $30,000.00. The lobbyist refused to agree to this requested arrangement.

Now, it is interesting that the honest lobbyist is not named. But, I guess it's not to difficult for someone to do a little digging and figure out when Michael Murphy was elected to the AMAFCA Board, and then hop over to the Secretary of State's website and discover who was registered as a lobbyist for AMAFCA at that time.

However, the big question here that is not quite as easily answered is who are the "two influential politicians" that were supposed to receive $30,000 from Michael Murphy? It would be safe to assume we are not talking about Manny Aragon, since he is already identified in the filing as a co-conspirator. Are these unnamed influential politicians still serving in the Legislature? Are they Democrats or Republicans? Can they still be bought for $30,000?

Speaking of unnamed folks in the legislature:

During the 2003 legislative session, Defendant Aragon told a legislative staff member to redirect funds that had been allocated in 1999 to two other projects to the Metropolitan Courthouse for use as additional funding on that project. Defendant Aragon's statements, which caused the redirection of the funds, made additional funds accessible to the members of the conspiracy related to the building of the Metropolitan Courthouse.

Kind of makes you wonder who is this unnamed "legislative staff member" who aided and abetted in defrauding the taxpayers? The 2003 legislative session wasn't that long ago. Is this person still working in the legislature? Are they now assisting other politicians in making "additional funds accessible" for other building conspiracies?

I've got to run, but let me leave you with this thought...

The next time you read in the paper about "ethics reform efforts" being proposed by the Legislature, you might want to ponder if any of those serving on the ethics task force are actually the unnamed politicians from the conspiracy.

Remove Charter Schools Limits

Sorry, I've been pretty sporadic about posting lately. There is so much going on in the political arena with all of the open (and opening) seats for Congress, and yet, there really isn't anything happening. Names are still be floated. People are still trying to figure out what to do. And, the reality is that if folks don't make a decision soon, no one is going to care until after the holiday season.

So, instead of writing about politics I thought I'd throw my two cents in about this little charter school article (subscription) that appeared in the Journal on Sunday:

[New Mexico Coalition of Charter Schools Lisa] Grover wants to challenge the 1999 law limiting the number of charters to 75 start-ups in a five-year period. The state now has 65, averaging almost 10 a year since 2000.

"It's one of the most insidious caps," she said.

Also, charters are not allowed to expand beyond a maximum enrollment set at their initial application.

"If a school is proving itself," Grover said, "why should that school have to wait until renewal time to open up its classrooms to more kids?"

There are 3,500 students on waiting lists for these schools, she said, indicating "we need to grow."

If people want to send their kids to charter schools, they should be able to do so. The maximum enrollment cap is ridiculous and should be eliminated by the legislature.

Charter School Limits Should Be Removed

Sorry, I've been pretty sporadic about posting lately. There is so much going on in the political arena with all of the open (and opening) seats for Congress, and yet, there really isn't anything happening. Names are still be floated. People are still trying to figure out what to do. And, the reality is that if folks don't make a decision soon, no one is going to care until after the holiday season.

So, instead of writing about politics I thought I'd throw my two cents in about this little charter school article (subscription) that appeared in the Journal on Sunday:

[New Mexico Coalition of Charter Schools Lisa] Grover wants to challenge the 1999 law limiting the number of charters to 75 start-ups in a five-year period. The state now has 65, averaging almost 10 a year since 2000.

"It's one of the most insidious caps," she said.

Also, charters are not allowed to expand beyond a maximum enrollment set at their initial application.

"If a school is proving itself," Grover said, "why should that school have to wait until renewal time to open up its classrooms to more kids?"

There are 3,500 students on waiting lists for these schools, she said, indicating "we need to grow."

If people want to send their kids to charter schools, they should be able to do so. The maximum enrollment cap is ridiculous and should be eliminated by the legislature.

Completing the Ethics Hat Trick

So, what's ethical behavior look like? Well, I recommend you read this recent post by Heath Haussamen in it's entirety. Here is an excerpt:

[House Minority Leader Tom Taylor, R-Farmington] and his sisters have owned five acres of land next to the county’s DWI Treatment Center for years. They decided against selling the land for $240,000 some 15 years ago, hoping to someday do something with it.

The day has arrived. County officials were planning to turn an old detention facility in nearby Aztec into a meth treatment facility with the help of a $2.9 million grant from the state, but the jail was deemed unfit. As officials searched for a new location, they decided the best option would be adding on to the DWI center, the newspaper reported.

That meant they’d need land owned by Taylor. The lawmaker told the newspaper he didn’t want anyone to think he and the county were doing anything underhanded, so he didn’t want to sell the land to the county.

So he convinced his sisters to agree to donate it.

Funny, Representative Taylor didn't need a commission to advise him what might be ethical behavior. He didn't need new laws passed in order to determine what would be the right thing to do.

You know what folks? We don't need more laws. Instead, we need more leaders like Tom Taylor.

Legislating Ethics

Big SIGH... An Albuquerque Journal poll has 88% of Democrats supporting stricter ethic laws.

You can't legislate ethics. Sorry, it would be nice if you could, but you can't. Why? Well, it's pretty simple. Ethical behavior is how a person acts when they think no one is looking and they believe there is no chance of them getting caught.

Somethings can be legislated, some can't. Ethics is one of those things that can't. Sure, you can pass new laws that make you feel better, but they won't make people behave ethically. Which leaves us with the question of whether or not we need new ethics laws?

Stop and think for a minute and you'll realize that we don't. Several elected officials have been indicted in the last couple of years under current laws, so we know there are laws on the books to punish those whose unethical behavior is illegal.

Now what's scary about this argument is that it puts me in agreement with New Mexico House Speaker Ben Lujan (subscription):

House Speaker Ben Lujan, D-Santa Fe, said he thought his chamber will endorse additional proposals next year, although he was hesitant about establishing a state ethics commission.

"The issue here is ethical conduct," he said of the proposed commission. "You're never going to be able to legislate morals. You have those rules in Congress and look at what is happening there."

And, you know what? Speaker Ben Lujan knows of what he speaks. So, where does that leave us? If we really want ethical politicians, then we as voters need to take the time to care enough to vote out those who do not act ethically. That's the solution, plain and simple.

Paying for the Governor's Follies

It was bound to happen. New Mexico has "enjoyed" a Governor who likes to spend, spend and then spend a little more. Governor Bill Richardson has given us expensive trains that hardly anyone takes and spaceports that no one uses all on the public dime. Time and time again we were assured that this was not going to take away funds from other transportation projects. Well, it looks like the bill has arrive (subscription):

Increasing New Mexico's 17-cent gasoline tax by 6 percent a year— or about 1.3 cents a year for the first decade— could go a long way toward building and repairing the state's roadways, leaders of a highway construction task force said Thursday.

Rep. Patricia Lundstrom, D-Gallup, and state Transportation Commission Chairman Johnny Cope head up a group looking for ways to pump extra money into the state's financially troubled highway construction programs. They both said they like the idea of automatically raising the gasoline tax each year.

Each additional penny to the tax would generate roughly $6.8 million a year for spending on state roads.

A second revenue-raising idea has also caught their fancy, the task force leaders said: a new state fee of an undetermined amount on vehicles based on weight.

Have these folks lost their mind? They've allowed the state budget to almost double over the last few years, and now they want to bring in more money by increasing taxes and fees. How much more money do they need?

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.

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.

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.

Quick Note to Our Wise State Senators

Dear New Mexico State Senators:

Please don't believe the spin coming out of the Governor's office that is intended to remove your backbone and get you to vote up or down on the bills being pushed in this ridiculous special session. I say ridiculous because if these were issues of real importance to New Mexicans, they would have been addressed during the regular 60 day sessions along with the VERY important issues of the day - like cockfighting.

Plus, let's face it, Governor Bill Richardson can't really be all that committed to the bills he has before you. If he was, Governor Richardson would actually be in New Mexico lobbying for your support instead of taping a comedy show in New York. No, the Governor is sending a clear message that this session is not a priority for him.

Worse, I'm afraid that if you do not hold your ground, you will be the laughingstock of state legislatures throughout the nation. Think about it. Governor Richardson will tell confidants, "I've got the legislature on such a tight leash that when I whisper 'jump' from New York, they ask "how high?"

Governor Bill Richardson is termed out of office and has already begun looking for greener pastures. On the other hand, you, my dear Senators, could be setting a precedent here that will minimize your effectiveness and transform you to nothing more than a rubber stamping body for years to come.

I hope you will continue doing the right thing and adjourned as soon as you are convened.

Sincerely,

Mario Burgos

If No One Is There To Watch

So, the Governor signed legislation banning cockfighting. However, I thought this was an interesting wrinkle:

The bill outlaws participation in cockfights, making it a petty misdemeanor on the first offense, a misdemeanor on second offense and a fourth-degree felony punishable by up to 18 months in prison for a third or subsequent offense.

Spectators could not be charged.

Is it a cockfight if no one is there to watch? I wonder why the exception? Now mind you, this is not an issue I feel strongly about one way or another. After all, it is a little hard to get excited by this "landmark" legislation when I'm reading reports like this (subscription required):

New Mexico's K-12 education system received four F's in a report released this week by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Several states ranked near the bottom along with New Mexico in the chamber's "Leaders and Laggards: A State-by-State Report Card on Educational Effectiveness," including Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi.

Yup, it's great to see that New Mexico's elected officials have their priorities in order - poultry followed by children. I'm curious how that is going to play on the presidential campaign trail? FDR promised a chicken in every pot. Richardson promises a rooster out of every ring. Ah yes, definite frontrunner material.

Where to Spend All the Money?

The legislative session is more than half over, and it is always amusing to see where our legislators think our tax dollars should be spent:

AN ACT MAKING AN APPROPRIATION FOR SCHOOL STUDENTS TO ATTEND SEMIPROFESSIONAL BASKETBALL GAMES. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO:

Section 1. APPROPRIATION.--One hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) is appropriated from the general fund to the public education department for expenditure in fiscal year 2008 to purchase and distribute tickets to school students for semiprofessional basketball games. Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of fiscal year 2008 shall revert to the general fund.

I like a good basketball game as much as the next guy, but isn't this a little silly? Exactly who asked for this legislation, Tingley Colosseum, Albuquerque ThunderbirdIs, or the schools. And Mayor Martin Chavez wants to build an arena where and for how much? I wonder how much we'll have to appropriate to send school children to that arena.

Remove the Veil of Secrecy

Heath Haussamen has a post on opening the legislative conference committee meetings to the public that is worth reading.

Eminent Domain Redux

You probably remember how eminent domain legislation sailed through committees last year and was unanimously presented to Governor Richardson to sign into law - only to be vetoed. You remember that, right?

Then chances are that you will also recall that Bill Richardson was one