Attorney General Gary King announced today that ethics and campaign finance reforms are among his agenda items for this year’s legislative session. He also wants legislation to help prevent DWIs and underage drinking as well as bills to aid against border violence.

“I am particularly interested in helping New Mexico enact a good, strong public disclosure law so that at a minimum all funds used for political campaign purposes, and all of the sources for those funds, are fully disclosed,” King said in a statement. “Additionally, I will again urge the Legislature to enact a law that prohibits government contractors from donating funds to the government officials with whom they contract, and to require full disclosure of all funds either given to them in the past or directed to other organizations, including nonprofits, at the request of the elected officials.”

King said that he wants all local government employees to be subject to the Governmental Conduct Act, the same law that state officers and workers are bound by.

King voiced support for changes to the Money Laundering Act “to update property crime violations and Administrative subpoenas for computer and bank records to investigate and prosecute sexual exploitation.”

“Experience as a former member of the House of Representatives reminds me of how quickly the window closes for important legislation to be drafted, debated and finally passed into law,” said King, who served as a member of the state House for 12 years. “Therefore, as expeditiously as possible, I will be drawing on that experience combined with whatever influence I may have in my job as Attorney General to help promote laws that serve to protect New Mexico families.”

King announced his legislative priorities in a press release sent to the media Monday morning.

Denish says a commission is overdue given the run of scandals that have sent several high-profile public officials to prison.

Martinez says an ethics commission would amount to nothing more than window dressing.

Their differing views were on display Sunday at the second gubernatorial debate at Congregation Albert in Albuquerque.

“On day one I’m going to appoint an independent ethics commission,” Denish told the crowd at the Albuquerque synagogue. “It’s shameful that the governor and the Legislature haven’t been able to get this done. This will be a commission with teeth. We need to get this done. The time for talk is past.”

Martinez swatted away the idea, telling the crowd that a commission is “merely politicians appointing other politicians to review the conduct of politicians.”

At the core of the two candidates’ disagreement is how well an independent ethics commission would function, if created.

More than 40 other states have ethics commissions—some more effective than others

For four years Gov. Bill Richardson and state lawmakers have wrestled over how to set up a state ethics commission, who would sit on it and who would appoint them. That an agreement has proved elusive is an understatement. The concept has proved deeply unpopular at the Capitol, and never even appeared as if it has a chance to pass.

“One thing we’ve found during this is that the devil is in the details,” said Steven Robert Allen, executive director of New Mexico Common Cause, a government watchdog group that has advocated for an ethics commission. “It’s definitely possible to set up an ethics commission that is not particularly effective. So Martinez has a point.”

But, Allen added, “a state ethics commission set up appropriately can be an effective tool to investigate claims against officials.”

Ethics commissions in other states such as Ohio and Connecticut have investigated and fined governors and other officials for ethical lapses, demonstrating that some panels have some bite and aren’t merely showpieces.

For a commission to have credibility in New Mexico, Allen said, it would have to be bi-partisan, meaning members from both political parties were appointed. It also would have to receive full funding and be empowered to issue subpoenas to conduct thorough investigations, he added.

Were New Mexico to create such a panel it would join 41 other states that already have some form of a commission, including many of its neighbors like Colorado, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and Nevada, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

Arizona, like New Mexico, does not have one.

Denish would use executive order to create commission; Martinez wants to use State Police

Denish’s campaign said Monday that her idea would be to create a non-partisan independent ethics commission by executive order on the first day she is governor.

“She would like for the governor, Legislature and the courts to have appointments to this commission,” Denish’s spokesman, Chris Cervini, said in an e-mail message to The Independent.

The commission would have subpoena power and be able to turn over findings from its investigations to the Attorney General for prosecution, Cervini said.

Martinez, on the other hand, would eschew any talk of a commission if she were elected governor. Instead she would establish a new division in the New Mexico State Police to help root out corruption “because we must treat it as a crime,” Martinez’s campaign manager Ryan Cangliosi said in an e-mail message to The Independent.

“It is a far too common occurrence these days to pick up a paper in the morning and read about another scandal, investigation and shady deal involving state government.  We must put an end to the culture of corruption,” Cangliosi said in his e-mail.

Cangliosi didn’t answer whether Martinez would veto legislation creating an ethics commission if it made it to the governor’s desk.

2010 proposal could have punished whistleblowers; advocates ended up opposing it

Advocates for the state ethics commission in New Mexico started pushing for its creation in 2007 after former state treasurer Robert Vigil was convicted of attempted extortion. The push for a commission has only gotten louder as other public officials, including former state Senate President Manny Aragon, have gone to federal prison for corruption.

Despite the constant drumbeat of scandals, the concept has never gotten close to passing, thanks to a coalition of Democratic and Republican lawmakers who oppose the idea.

This year, advocates for a commission actively opposed the bill after lawmakers added language that would have punished a  person who publicly spoke of their testimony before the commission more harshly than those who are found to have violated the public trust.

“When you have a complaint department you want to disconnect it from the people who are being complained about,” said Sen. Clint Harden, R-Clovis, explaining why he doesn’t like the commission idea. “I agree with Martinez, and I don’t think the fox should be guarding the henhouse.”

Harden said he’d be more open to discussing a concept not often mentioned at the Capitol — limiting how long legislative leaders can serve in their leadership positions.

“I’m not saying we should term limit the Speaker of the House or the president pro tem,” Harden said. “But those kind of issues should be on the table. I’m comfortable with the Senate leadership. But I just think it’s something we all should look at.

Using State Police would put all control under the Governor

Sen. Cisco McSorley, D-Albuquerque, however, says New Mexico desperately needs an independent state ethics commission because of all the corruption that has given New Mexico a black eye. A commission would follow the best practices already set up in many other states.

Creating a new division within the State Police, as Martinez has proposed, would mean all decisions would come from the executive branch, McSorley said, making some skeptical of any prosecutions.

“She and the executive department want to control any investigations of ethical misdeeds,” McSorley said. “That’s basically what we’ve had with Bill Richardson. She is showing her contempt for best practices across the nation.”

The bill now has less than 48 hours to try and get through the Senate.

“It has a good chance,” said sponsor Rep. Jose Campos, D-Santa Rosa, “it’s a good bill.”

The debate became heated at times and House Republicans at one point requested a ‘call of the House,’ meaning the chamber doors are locked and those members are not allowed to leave until it is lifted.

As it stands now, a lobbyist can collect money from several clients and then “bundle” them into a contribution to a candidate. But because of the bundling, the public–and sometimes the candidate–don’t know exactly where the money came from.

“I think it would better to make things more professional and not have contributions from lobbyists,” Rep. Brian Egolf, D-Santa Fe, said during the debate.

Supporters of the bill say it will allow everyone to know who’s giving money to whom. While lobbyists would not be able to directly donate, lobbyists would be permitted to deliver un-bundled donations from their clients.

The 46-24 vote came after Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones, R-Albuquerque, tried to move a substitute that  would have prevented bundling of contributions from lobbyists’ clients and exempted lobbyists’ from the ban.

”Our constituents are absolutely furious about pay-to-play,” she said, pointing a number of state scandals and arguing “there is nothing, absolutely nothing in this bill that would’ve stopped that.”

Those who have a state contract worth over $250,000 dollars would also be banned from making contributions. But opponents of the measure argued the bill would drive the political money in the state underground and not prevent the pay-to-play scandals it aims to stop.

They argue the recent pay-for-play concerns had to do with companies who sought state contracts after making sizable donations to candidates, and again said HB 118 wouldn’t stop it.

Opponents also argued that the bill wouldn’t stop contractors from using a third party to make the contributions to candidates or parties.

HB 118 has had a long fight to this point. House committees revised it and also required it be combined with a similar bill.  Tuesday’s vote came after the bills sponsor stopped debate on Monday to revise the bill again.

The State of the State speech is delivered to open every regular session and serves as a road map for the Governor’s plan. Bills are assigned to a number of committees they must pass through before they reach any chamber floor. If they pass one chamber they must go through the process again in the other. With time winding down lawmakers will have to weigh what they think is important. And look at what bills can move vs. how far they think they can go.

Not surprisingly, Governor Richardson spent a large part of his speech on the state’s budget woes:

While we can make more targeted cuts, it is important to note that most state agencies have been cut to the bone. Any further cuts would mean certain lay-offs, closing facilities and ending public services when our citizens need them most. But I also believe that increasing taxes – alone – is irresponsible and not the answer to balancing the budget Nor should we roll back important tax cuts and incentives that we’ve used to create jobs and open New Mexico for business. To be fair and responsible we need to take the middle path, a balanced approach that combines targeted spending cuts and short-term revenues with strong accountability measures.

This is still the main fight moving through the Roundhouse. The House of Representatives has passed a budget with some budget cuts, but also with nearly $300 million dollars worth of various tax increases. The Governor praised the House for passing the budget but expressed ‘reservations’ over tax increases. With a week to go the budget is in the hands of the Senate, where tax increases will be a tough sell.

I will also oppose any tax increase that hurts our efforts to keep the state economically competitive and create new jobs – such as:

• Increasing personal income taxes

• Rolling back our capital gains tax cuts or

• Decreasing business tax incentives or credits that are working to

create jobs

Nor will I support reinstating the food tax.

Among one of these points it looks like lawmakers are ready to challenge the Governor. House bill 9, which has passed through the House, increases the personal income tax of wealthier New Mexicans by 1.5 percent. And while lawmakers have not brought back the full food tax, the House has passed a bill temporarily reinstating the gross receipts tax. And a bill in the Senate would redefine some foods and make them eligible to be taxed.

I want New Mexico to be the first state in the nation to have a Hispanic Education Act. We will be held accountable for results– by creating an annual report card on the status of Hispanic Education.

After a lengthy debate The House passed the Hispanic Education Act bill 44-25, and it now heads on to the Senate. That was one of three bills titled “Hispanic Education Act.”

My bottom line is this: I don’t want to cut teacher salaries and I don’t want to cut classroom spending. If we have to cut education spending, we should start with the bureaucracy and district administrations.

The will of the Roundhouse seems to agree with the Governor on some of these points. Many agree classrooms should be spared from the slumping budget, and to a lesser degree teacher salaries. There is a bill brought forth to protect educators from having to contribute more to their retirement. However, if there is a across the board salary cut for state employees it could include teachers unless an exception is made.

…several vital reforms have been put off for too long:

• Whistleblower protections to shield employees from retaliation for reporting fraud, waste or abuse.

• Disclosure by any contractor wishing to make a bid on a state project of any campaign contribution of two hundred and fifty dollars or more over the last two years.

• A ban on candidates doing taxpayer–funded, public service announcements.

• An end to the revolving door where legislators this year become lobbyists next year. Just like we did for state officials.

• A ban on campaign contributions by corporations, state contractors or lobbyists.

There are two whistleblower bills at the Roundhouse. One each in the House and Senate, and both have passed one chamber. The Governors bill to ban campaign contributions by corporations, state contractors or lobbyists is still trying to get out of its second committee. A bill to regulate elected officials in public service announcements and another to stop legislators from becoming lobbyists have yet to clear their first committees.

I believe we need an independent, bi-partisan, citizen-led ethics commission.

There are six bills (3 in the House, 3 in Senate) relating to a state ethics commission. Five of those bills have only cleared one committee, the other has cleared none.

To make sure New Mexico remains competitive against Virginia, Florida and Texas, I’m asking this body to pass legislation allowing participants to assume the risks of spaceflight.

A bill to address this, called the “Space Flight Informed Consent Act”, has passed the Senate and is in the House.

Due to our past efforts, and given the direction the industry is moving in, we have a unique opportunity over the next twelve to eighteen months to make this industry an integral part of our state’s economy along with ranching, oil and gas, and other core sectors. And with more than twelve thousand New Mexico students around the state currently preparing for a career in film and media production, our commitment to this industry is our commitment to their future.

The film incentives continue to be a hot topic in Santa Fe. A bill that would’ve removed the film credits altogether died in its first committee. But two other bills aiming to cap the film incentives have cleared one Senate committee.

Specifically, I will once again push for tougher penalties for gang crimes and criminal gang recruitment and I will close loopholes in our DWI laws that allow offenders to skip out of mandatory jail time.

DWI bills have hit a few stumbling blocks in the Roundhouse. As far as gang legislation there are five bills dealing it, a couple that have moved the farthest have passed two committees.

Our tax code is hitting too many homeowners with unfair increases— sometimes two or three times as much as their neighbors—I will send this legislature a proposal to move us toward a fair and equitable property tax system.

A measure to stop so called “tax lightening” was one of the Governors priorities. There are at least two bills to stop home buyers with getting hit with high tax bills after their purchase. The bill in the Seante has cleared two committees, the House measure has yet to clear one.

Our tribal communities have over one billion dollars in critical infrastructure needs. I believe its time to dedicate modest recurring funding –five percent of annual severance tax bond capacity–to our successful Tribal Infrastructure Fund.

This measure is moving through the Roundhouse but not without a fight. The bill did clear the House on a 42-24 vote. It now waits for a hearing in the Senate.

It’s time to fully extend Domestic Partnership rights. A committed couple, who agrees to spend their lives together, deserves equal protection under the law. And as I’ve said before and I will say again- –As a state whose diversity is its strength, we cannot accept discrimination in any form.

This bill continues to receive more attention than many in the Roundhouse. Technically, the bill has cleared one committee and it sits in Senate Finance where it waits for a hearing. The committee has said it won’t get a hearing until after the budget. How much time, if any, is left to hear it after that remains to be seen.

]]> http://newmexicoindependent.com/47037/state-of-the-state-1-week-left/feed 0 http://newmexicoindependent.com/46421/comprimise-ethics-bill-finally-moves http://newmexicoindependent.com/46421/comprimise-ethics-bill-finally-moves#comments Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:53:51 +0000 Larry Behrens http://newmexicoindependent.com/?p=46421 For the third time in about a week, supporters of House Bill 118 tried to move their bill through the House Voters and and Elections Committee. The committee had asked the sponsor of HB 118Rep. Jose Campos, D-Santa Rosa, to…

House Bill 118 is sponsored by Rep. Jose Campos, D-Santa Rosa, and is supported by Think New Mexico. The bill would stop government contractors, lobbyists and special interests from making contributions to state or local officials. It would also make certain non-profits who engage in political advocacy disclose their funding sources.

The measure has bi-partisian support and is the result countless hours, yet HB 118 will have to wait a little longer for the shot to pass its first committee. With just over two weeks left in the 2010 Legislative session the clock is running but supporters are still optimistic.

Supporters of HB 118 say the snag may ultimately work in their favor. “Two weeks is an eternity in legislative time, even though its not a lot on a calendar,” said Fred Nathan, executive director of Think New Mexico. Nathan added with more voices putting their input into the bill law makers may move it along faster through the Roundhouse.

If the bill makes it out of House Voters and Elections it is slated to go to the House Judiciary Committee then possibly on to the House.

Talking about the status quo, Fred Nathan, director of Think New Mexico, a non-profit group pushing hard for the bill, said: “We think it’s hypocritical, we think it’s unfair and we think it’s wrong.”

Representatives from the League of Women Voters and Common Cause New Mexico also stood up in support of the bill. Opposing the measure was the ACLU, arguing the bill “impinges directly on the freedom of speech.”

The bill came before the House Voters and Elections Committee on Thursday, but a substitute bill complicated things.  Several of the members of the committee had signed on to support the bill but once the substitute was brought out, so were members’ reservations.

“We get a substitute bill dumped on us, first thing in the morning, and no time to read it,” said Rep. Kathy McCoy, R-Cedar Crest, adding “I would rather sit down at a quiet time to read this.”

The committee agreed, voting unanimously to table the bill until the substitute can go through the vetting process.

Supporters say the move is a fair one, and they fully believe the new bill will be heard again on Tuesday. If it clears House Voters and Elections it would have to go through another committee before reaching the house floor.

Photo by Peter St. Cyr

The first day of the 2010 session ended as it began: with no clear plan to solve New Mexico’s worst budget troubles in decades.

Most everyone, meanwhile, stuck to their prepared opening-day scripts.

Republicans, and anti-tax protesters, chafed at the mention of raising new taxes to plug the budget hole, saying more spending cuts were needed. Certain leading Democrats, and advocates for the least vulnerable, pushed broad-based tax increases, saying services already had been cut too much.

It was the usual drawing of lines in the sand by state lawmakers before the serious budget negotiations commence. The state faces a shortfall variously estimated between $500 million to $900 million for next year, depending on whom you ask.

If past experience is any guide, the budget negotiations will come fits and starts over the next four weeks, with bouts of frustration interspersed with glimmers of hope.

But that deal will eventually come, said House Majority Leader Ken Martinez, D-Grants.

“There may be a group of people who will say I will not vote for X, for certain cuts, for certain increases, but I think you will see us gathering a majority in both houses that will vote for what’s necessary to govern,” Martinez said of the House and the Senate.

But on Tuesday, all the crosscurrents of rhetoric and the hard-and-fast lines drawn up, created expectations for a train wreck before the light at the end of the tunnel turns out to be a budget deal.

Gov. Bill Richardson, for his part, tried to set a conciliatory tone for the coming 30 days of budget debate in a 35-minute speech to the New Mexico Legislature’s 112 members.

Richardson said he wanted a sensible, no-frills budget that will close next year’s budgetary shortfall, a package including targeted tax increases and spending cuts.

He also set an ambitious agenda beyond addressing the state’s budgetary troubles.

Richardson told lawmakers he wanted them to pass domestic partnerships, which would extend many of the same rights that married couples enjoy to same-sex couples; a statewide ban on hand-held cell phones for motorists; a newly created ethics commission and other ethics reforms; tougher penalties for gang involvement; and stricter domestic violence legislation.

The laundry list of Richardson’s priorities left some state lawmakers predicting such hot-button issues like domestic partnerships and ethics reform would clog up the process.

“These are issues that bring a lot of attention into the Capitol,” said Sen. Minority Whip William Payne, R-Albuquerque. “They result in long committee hearings. They start backing up the process toward the end. Some people benefit from the confusion in the system. But I don’t think the taxpayers this year are necessarily needing that type of distraction.”

But the main priority Tuesday was addressing the state’s budget mess, which is so serious the Legislature met in a October special session to cut this year’s spending by more than $500 million.

The decisions made in October make lawmakers’ jobs somewhat easier, but only slightly.

Without being too specific, Richardson in his speech set parameters for what he wanted to see in whatever budget deal materializes.

“We must not turn our backs on our most vulnerable citizens, nor should we be reckless with budget cuts and reverse the progress we’ve made during the past seven years,” he said.

Further cuts to state agencies, meanwhile, “would mean certain lay-offs, closing facilities and ending public services when our citizens need them most,” he added. The governor has said he wants to avoid state worker layoffs after requiring 17,000 state workers to take five furlough days this budget year, which ends June 30.

Richardson also said he didn’t want to cut teacher salaries or classroom spending.

Richardson repeated his oft-quoted opposition to certain tax increases, like raising the state’s income tax or removing the food exemption from the state’s gross receipts tax.

Instead, he said he wanted smaller tax increases. Read so-called sin taxes, tobacco and liquor. Richardson also has indicated an openness to removing candy and soft drinks from the GRT food exemption to raise roughly $18 million in tax revenue.

Richardson’s stance on taxes puts him at odds with his staunchest legislative ally, House Speaker Ben Lujan, D-Santa Fe.

In fact, the Democrats, who control the Legislature, mostly support some package of tax increases, but are in disagreement over whether to adopt a broad-based tax increase or to target very specific taxes for increases.

Lujan has proposed a half-cent increase in the state’s gross receipts tax. It is a proposal also supported by powerful Santa Fe lawmaker, Rep. Luciano “Lucky” Varela, chair of the Legislative Finance Committee.

“If we’re going to do something with the shortfall, and we put these little pieces together, we’re going to lose some of it somewhere,” Varela said. “I’d rather have two broad-based taxes, which is the income tax and gross receipts tax.”

Sen. John Arthur Smith, D-Deming, and chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, meanwhile, has reluctantly stated a preference for raising a tax here, and a tax there, rather than passing a broad based tax increase.

Meanwhile, Republicans are marching in near unity: they don’t want tax increases, period.

“I don’t think we need to raise taxes on anyone,” said Senate Minority Leader Stuart Ingle, R-Portales. “It sends a signal that the minute that things get bad New Mexico is going to punish businesses and individuals. We don’t need to do that.”

Added Payne, Ingle’s Sen. Minority Whip: “A lot more cutting needs to be done. Certainly I agree with Sen. Ingle. Tax increases on working people and investment income is certainly not going to get us any nearer to closing the gap. But what it will do is probably retard the return to normalcy longer.”

“There’s a billion dollars out there last year that went un-audited–and that is just unacceptable,”  says State Auditor Hector Balderas.

We’ve already told you about the ethics bills he is looking to push through the legislature this year and in the group is a bill to penalize state agencies who are behind on their audits, Balderas says “They don’t deserve any funding if you’re behind on the audit act”.

Balderas’ office set up a fraud hotline to allow citizens to anonymously report . Balderas says so far about one third of the calls have to do with state contracts and conflict of interest.  Balderes says those calls and the embezzlement of $3.3 million dollars from a small New Mexico school district are some of the reasons for his ethics push this session.