I am writing today to announce the closure of the New Mexico Independent. After three and a half years of operation in New Mexico, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news…
While environmental activists played their part yesterday during demonstrations at the capitol building, going so far as to dress up as solar panels and to sing the tune of “You Are My Sunshine,” their counterparts, the anti-cap-and-trade contingency who has…
Roughly one quarter of University of New Mexico students are unimpressed with the state’s flagship public school, according to a survey that questioned college students about their higher education experiences.
The state Senate passed a campaign contributions bill this morning. The vote was 38-0, an easy passage by any standard for a piece of legislation.
But before you think it caps contributions to political candidates in legislative and statewide races, one of the signature pieces of legislation in this year’s ethics reform package, it doesn’t.
Instead the Senate bill 451 that passed would limit the amount of money a candidate for the board of the Public Employees Retirement Association could accept during a campaign and, if he or she wins, during the term of office.
According to an analysis of the bill, the legislation would:
prohibit “retirement board candidates from accepting anything of value of more than $6,000 in the aggregate of monetary contributions, in kind services or anything else of value, from any one or more persons, whether made directly to the candidate, a political committee or an entity supporting the candidate’s election. This limit applies during the period of the candidate’s campaign, and during the candidates term of office until the next campaign for board membership should the candidate win the election.”
The legislation also “adds additional requirements to make a post-election report accounting for all campaign expenditures, including the purposes of the expenditures.”
The issue has gained momentum when some candidates for the board questioned in 2007 whether the powerful American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees giving money to other candidates gave those candidates an unfair advantage.
