Eric Draper

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Eric Draper had free reign to take pictures at Kirtland Air Force Base on May 27, 2008.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Let’s place the picture in its proper context.

Draper, a former Associated Press photographer who previously staffed for the Albuquerque Tribune, the Pasadena Star-News and The Seattle Times, was the personal photographer to President George W. Bush.

Draper had a front seat to watch the making of history for eight years. He took pictures of all of it along the way. Here during Bush's last official visit to Albuquerque for a fund raiser for Sheriff Darren White's primary campaign, Draper has the backdrops of the presidential aircraft and limousine.

Draper now lives in Rio Rancho and has hung out his political photography shingle.

My blogging buddy Peter St. Cyr, seen above Draper's right shoulder, in the tan cap, in front of Air Force One's engine, has an interview with Draper in this month's Albuquerque the Magazine.

It’s worth the four bucks. Draper’s work is on the net. Agree or disagree with George Bush, the man; the presidential coverage is impressive.

Draper has been replaced at the White House by Peter J. Souza as chief official photographer.

I made this working portrait of Souza a couple of months ago when President Barack Obama came to visit Draper’s hometown, Rio Rancho.

Souza is not new to the White House photographer’s job, he was President Ronald Regan’s official photographer.

Who says images can’t cross Party lines?

Still Number One

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

That’s right, this man thinks I’m still number one.

“All the world is a stage,” wrote William Shakespeare, in “As You Like It,” in Act 2 scene 7.

As a journalist, there is a working theory that you are not supposed to become part of the news.

Journalists often times will duck out of a scene when they realize that they might be included in a camera’s view.

I must have slept through that lecture in Writing for Mass Media I, where the ground rules might have been outlined, because I chase the image. I don’t care if other journalists are in my pictures. Part of what I do, is place subjects in their context and to show who is covering the event. It’s also why I photograph the entourage traveling with politicians, including their security.

It’s especially true for politicians and at political events large or small.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Act One:

Monday May 18, 2009

I attended a media event announced by Mayor Martin J. Chávez’ Chief Public Information Officer Deborah James who provided this release:

May 15, 2009
Contact: Deborah James 379-2844

MEDIA ADVISORY

WHAT: Mayor Martin J. Chávez Joins APS Superintendent Winston Brooks to Discuss Upcoming Dropout Summit


WHERE: Albuquerque High School - 800 Odelia NE – Patio Area

WHEN: Monday, May 18, 2008 @ 11:00 a.m.

I called my client Ched MacQuigg Diogenes' six, whose posts feature ethical questions at Albuquerque Public Schools, City and State governments, asking if he wished to also attend. He did.

Upon arriving at Albuquerque High School, we sought out the administration offices to sign in, but were greeted by Principal Tim McCorkle in front of his office. He took a look at my three cameras and photo vest, welcomed us and directed us to the doors to the patio, between an APS police officer and security aide.

Mayor Chávez and Superintendent Winston Brooks each arrived with a several member entourage.

Chávez was accompanied by: Communications Officer James, two Albuquerque Police Department's Mayoral Protection Detail Detectives, and Mayor's Education Coordinator Paul Broome, who was already present.

Brooks, right, was accompanied by: Community Relations Office Executive Director Monica Armenta, center, and Communications Specialist John Miller, left.

Newly elected APS Board Member Lorenzo Garcia, left was present.

James, right, was handing out Chávez’ talking points. I had to ask her for a copy. She apologized saying she had given a copy to my friend and thought we were together. I told her that we worked together and separately. She was her normally pleasant and polite self.

Chávez, Brooks and Broome made their presentation.


Chávez’ big announcement was a restatement about the upcoming “Dropout Summit,” May 29 and 30.

Brooks’ major point is extending normal high school hours into the evening to help accommodate students at risk of dropping out.

At the end of the statements, Chávez asked if there were any questions. MacQuigg, below right, raised his hand. Chávez asked if he was, “media?”

MacQuigg said yes and Chávez recognized him.

MacQuigg’s question was:

“The chief reason that kids don’t come to school is because they don’t want to. There are kids that will never fit the NCLB mold. And I’m wondering if there is anyway for us to offer a curriculum that is not driven by NCLB that provides for their needs? Is there anyway we can do it?”

“Absolutely,” Chávez said. “No, what we’re going to do with this summit, in all seriousness is we’re going to listen to the kids. And then we’re going to then combine the kids with the adults, heavily concentrated with the professionals in education. And then go through the process of dialogue. Then we’ll submit the report to APS. Whether APS decides it’s in the best interest of the student population to amend models. It will be totally an APS driven decision and its one I’ll stand behind,” Chávez said.

Chávez may have had some doubt about MacQuigg being a journalist as he said, “Let’s take the media questions right now, then I’ll be happy to stick around and speak to anybody that wants to talk." It's not his first time disregarding a particular medium, bloggers.

On his site, MacQuigg makes a big deal about how adults should role model the Pillars of Character Counts, here is his take of events.

This young man was apparently an AHS student photojournalist covering the event. His presence reminded me of how I began covering news In Albuquerque. It was a bit discouraging to have him see the law twisted to crush the press. I had hoped for him to see how he could move without interfering; how journalism can be fun and rewarding.

Associated Press Writer Heather Clark asked Brooks about the extended school hours.

Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer Andrea Schoellkopf and MacQuigg sat in the front row in front of the KOAT TV crew.

Other members of the media, like 770KKOB reporter Craig Kennedy who talked with Brooks, waited until they could have one-on-one on camera or audio-recorded interviews. Standard stuff; in the competitive news world, asking a question in the open allows anyone to use the answer. So, if a journalist knows they can get a one-on-one interview they will hold their particular question to get the exclusive answer. It’s pretty silly, but in the dog-eat-dog world of what passes for news these days; that’s the way the game is played.

MacQuigg spoke with Board Member Garcia who then sat with a group of students and was listening to them intently as they spoke in Spanish.

Chávez talked to people then left accompanied by Albuquerque High School Director of Student Activities Gabriel Antonio Gonzales.

A couple of minutes later I noticed a rush of a couple of APS police and at least two security aides come onto the patio. They made a direct path to where we were standing.

I hadn’t been on the other side of overwhelming force in decades and had forgotten what it looked like from the other side.

“You have to leave. You aren’t the press. You don’t have credentials,” APS Police Officer Paul Schaefer said in rapid succession as he took the contact role. “I was told you’re not part of the press club.”

“You’re wrong,” I said.

I looked at a pocket in my photo vest that has a clear plastic front. It’s designed to keep credentials visible yet out of the way. Print journalists often wear credentials on a lanyard around their neck. However, still photographers prefer not to wear lanyards as they interfere with neck straps; so the pocket is convenient. I had the pass issued by the Secret Service last week for the Presidential visit to Rio Rancho visible.

“White House Press Pool,” I asked Schaefer, showing him the pass?

“Never heard of it,” Schaefer said.

“Ever heard of the President of the United States?”

Vaguely,” Schaefer said.

“How about the First Amendment,” I asked?

I’ve heard of the First Amendment,” Schaefer said.

“As a matter of fact, when I…” I said, as I dug deeper for my own credentials, which list former and current clients and my own sites; there was also an old State Senate Press pass.

"but I’ve been told this isn’t a public event,” Schaefer said.

“Well it is a public event when you have the Mayor of the City of Albuquerque present,” I said.

“I was asked by one of the administrators…,” Schaefer said. “Don’t, please don’t.” MacQuigg had raised his cellular phone camera and taken Schaefer’s picture.

“Don’t. Don’t. Don’t,” Schaefer asked. “I’m just the messenger, OK?"

“When I walked into here, I was greeted by your principal,” I said.

“OK,” Schaefer said.

“Alright, he pointed me to where this event is…” I said.

“I don’t want my picture taken sir,” said Schaefer, as his attention shifted to MacQuigg.

“It doesn’t matter,” I said.

“Yes it does,” Schaefer said.

Things got a bit chaotic for a moment as one of the aides started demanding that, “you have to leave.”

As Schaefer focused on MacQuigg, I took a step back, raised my camera and took photographs of the officer.

A woman, who might have been a teacher or an administrator rushed toward me saying, “He asked you not to take his picture.”

“He’s a public official; he gets his picture taken,” I told her.

We were then told to go the office and sign in.

I knew what was about to transpire would be an exercise in the educational failures of the public schools and the police academy’s basic civics lessons and constitutional law courses.

One of the female aides insisted that it was an APS event and would not listen to, understand, or acknowledge that the City of Albuquerque notified the media of the press conference.

We were escorted to the administration offices and Gonzales was called for over the walkie-talkies several times, but he never showed up.

After several minutes of waiting for Gonzalez, Principal McCorkle arrived and Officer Schaefer started to explain what had transpired when Armenta came in asking what the problem was.

Schaefer said that we hadn’t signed in. I told her that we were being ejected because someone had challenged our status as the media. She asked, whom we were, knowing full well who we are. She called MacQuigg, Mr. MacQuigg.

I first met Monica Armenta in about 1984, when she was a University of New Mexico Journalism student interning at KOB. I was a Field Investigator and was on patrol driving east on Gold at 4th Street when I passed the old Federal Courthouse on the northeast corner. I didn’t actually recognize anything, but was compelled to circle the block. When I returned to the intersection I saw that a front first floor office was fully engulfed in flames. I called for the Fire Department, which arrived in a few minutes and quickly knocked down the fire. A few minutes later Armenta arrived with a cameraman.

Her qualifications as a field reporter were as much a part of her outgoing ways, as was her ability to: read a script, to properly enunciate difficult names and places. We spoke and I learned that this was one of her first story assignments she covered without a senior reporter shadowing her.

She did an on camera interview with me on the par of a murder investigation. The cameraman turned off the light and turned away when he was satisfied that he had 10 seconds of usable film for a sound bite.

Armenta challenged my credentials when I explained that I was a freelancer. I gave her my business card and showed her my credentials. She said she would have to check to see if freelancers were allowed. She returned my card. I was struck by the statement that she would have to check; with whom? Armenta is Community Relations Office Executive Director; she would be the one who makes such a determination.

MacQuigg asked her if she understood what the media was?

She replied that she had worked 25-years for KOB. After a short stint as a reporter, Armenta gravitated to an anchor position and became a newsreader. Her corporate background seemed to be influencing her concept of who are members of the media. She doesn’t know from freelancing.

I asked Principal McCorkle, left, if he hadn’t greeted us and directed us to the patio. He said he had, just like everybody else who came to the event. He then said maybe that was a mistake.

The APS policy on School Police Authority reads in part:

Visitors must comply with the rules of the school.

An individual failing to comply with any of these procedures and/or causing a disruption of the educational process may be barred or removed from the campus at the principal's discretion.

One would think that once the principal explained himself it should have been the end of it. Armenta disappeared and Schaefer backed away. However, it wasn’t over, APS Security Aide Angelique McGee didn’t understand what the principal said. The event was done, we were ready to leave, but she insisted on driving us like cattle from the campus.

MacQuigg wrote an e-mail to Armenta asking what credentials would satisfy her.

She responded, writing that the state police issue credentials.

From the most recent New Mexico State Police Media Guide, here is their definition:

Media Credentials

News outlets are encouraged to provide media credentials for their staff members covering incidents or events involving the State Police. Media credentials may be requested for access to an incident scene. During your on-scene investigation your cooperation is appreciated, in consideration of the many tasks and responsibilities placed on our personnel at the scene of an incident.

Armenta does not recognize or understand the history of local government issued media credentials. In the early 1970’s governments realized that the First Amendment’s first five words, “Congress shall make no law…” meant that not only was congress prohibited from making any law, but by the 14th Amendment, all states and their political subdivisions were prohibited from making any statute, ordinance or rule, “…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…”.

The Constitution’s “We the People…” is a limit on government and the Bill of Rights was added to assure additional protections. The media need not be a corporate venture to be “the press.” Journalists are those who keep journals, correspondents are those who send correspondence and the media are those who publish or broadcast to other people.

Through my reporting I was able to confirm Activities Director Gonzales told APS Officer Schaefer that MacQuigg and I were not media.

Gonzales, behind the mayor, had left the press conference with the Chávez entourage. Because Gonzales doesn’t know MacQuigg or me and the mayor and several members of his camp do know me, I am sure one of them told Gonzales that we were not media; I just don’t know which one.

Apparently I am not going to find out. People who are in a position to know or find out have been ordered to not talk, and to refer all questions to Armenta, whom I was told was preparing a response and would contact me. It might be difficult for her because she had no interest in communicating earlier and punctuated the point by returning my business card.

A call to James seeking information and comment, late Friday afternoon went unreturned.

In a short telephone interview, Gonzales, whose responsibilities according to his biography on the AHS Webpage includes Public Information, would not talk about his interaction with the Mayor’s staff that led him to tell APS Police that MacQuigg and I were not media.

“I want to refer you to the Communications Department – Monica Armenta, for comment.

I pointed out to Gonzales that, “Armenta can’t answer the question; only you can. It was you who talked with the mayor’s staff.”

“I’m referring you to Monica Armenta, or the mayor’s staff,” Gonzales said.

When I asked if he wasn’t in charge of public information at Albuquerque High School, he replied:

“I know that you appreciate the dignity of a person to hold a position. Have a good day. Good bye.” He hung up.


Act Two:

Thursday May 21, 2009

In another media advisory James announced that the mayor would be lighting a new display in the Big-I. It is the finishing touch on the long delayed landscaping project.

The event was scheduled for the westbound frontage road, west of the northbound frontage road, just past the I-25 fly-over. I arrived along with at least two television stations; KOAT and KRQE. James acknowledged me and pointed me in the direction of the event.

As I got closer, Albuquerque Police Department's Mayoral Protection Detail Sergeant Louie Sanchez was standing at the foot of a gravel path. He asked me to wait a minute until the mayor arrived.

Chávez arrived, paused to talk to Sanchez then went over the hill.

I asked if Sanchez was keeping me from going to the event and he wouldn’t answer directly. I asked him what he would do if I walked past him. He said he would issue me a “lawful order” to stop.

I asked him what would be the underlying charge; what crime would I be committing? He answered he was protecting the mayor from me. Sanchez said that Chávez was afraid of me, that I had assaulted him by pointing a camera with a big lens on it and that I had bumped the mayor.

I told Sanchez that I had touched Chávez only one time; actually he had touched me when he shook my hand the first time we met. I said Chávez’ did not fear me physically, but feared my photographs that have immense political power to show him as he is.

During the Mayoral campaign, candidate Martin Chávez approached the City Employee Labor Coalition on June 30, 1994, and asked for their support. He made several promises; that he would unilaterally return the take home cars to police officers (he would later back off that statement and say he would look at the financial aspect of returning the cars). Prior to asking for the endorsement of City unions’ Presidents, Chávez acknowledged that he recognized that Director of Employee Relations Bob Brown was an impediment to good relationships between the Mayor and City Employees. Chávez promised that on "day two" of his administration, Bob Brown would no longer be Director of Employee Relations. Upon being elected, Chávez reappointed Brown within a couple of months.

There was an irony that escaped Chávez, though some of the union leaders who were representing groups that were negotiating with the City had made disparaging comments about Brown publicly, it was in the context of the process and done in their respective roles. The reality was that Brown was neither the best or worse Director of Employee Relations. He had originally come from labor and he was appointed director after several years of playing a secondary role in Employee Relations. None of the leaders were seeking his removal and in comparison, one could talk with him.

I have no recollection of ever bumping Chávez. If I had it would have been unintentional and I would have profusely apologized immediately as is my nature. I’ve even been known to apologize for bumping into furniture.

I spoke with Sanchez about which possible crimes he was referring. He said assault. I asked him, what element of the crime of assault was missing? He asked me to define assault. It’s extremely disheartening to learn that veteran officer, six years a sergeant does not know the element of the most basic of crimes; the starting point of every violent crime on the books. Assault is the threat or fear of an immediate battery. A battery is the unlawful touching of another, done in a rude or insolent manner.

Albuquerque Code of Ordinances Chapter 12: Criminal Code

Article 2: Offenses Relating to Public Order and Safety

Section:

§ 12-2-1 ASSAULT.

Assault consists of either:

(A) An attempt to commit a battery upon the person of another; or

(B) Any unlawful act, threat, or menacing conduct which causes another person to reasonably believe that he is in danger of receiving an immediate battery; or

(C) The use of fighting words which by their very utterance are likely to cause an average addressee to fight.

§ 12-2-2 BATTERY.

Battery is the unlawful, intentional touching or application of force to the person of another when done in a rude, insolent or angry manner.

Sanchez said that my pointing a camera with a large lens on it was an assault. That he had seen me point my zoom lens at Chávez. Photography is not a crime, it is not a touching or an attempted touching. If Chávez is afraid of me, it’s not the front of the camera that should bother him; he should fear what comes out the back, accurate depictions of him.

I asked Sanchez if there were any police reports of these alleged assaults and the battery. He said no. I asked if there was ever a restraining order. Again no. I told him he had no reason to believe that I had committed a crime or was about to and did he know he was engaging in a form of censorship, prior restraint by denying access.

There is no probable cause to arrest me. There is just raw abuse of power to keep me from doing my job; photographing and reporting on the mayor. There is no “lawful order” Sanchez can issue.

Sanchez asked me if I knew what qualified immunity was. I said I did. Qualified immunity is the theory that a citizen may not sue the King without his permission. It applies to government and their agents in certain situations.

He said he’d talked to “the lawyers” who advised him he had qualified immunity. I asked him the name of the lawyer, but he wouldn’t answer.

What Sanchez was alluding to was that he could violate my rights and keep me from covering the mayor. He was suggesting that he could get away with violating civil rights and I would not be able to get him into court. Qualified immunity might be applied in State District Court.

What Sanchez doesn’t seem to realize is that an imposition on the free press is in the jurisdiction of the Federal District court, which would not recognize his qualified immunity.

However, what Sanchez had been told was to assure him that should he violate anyone’s rights, the City would fully defend him and for him to do what he thought he needed to do whether legal or not. I’ve heard it before.

Lawyers who gave Sanchez such advise are fundamentally corrupt because they ignore the Constitution.

I invited Sanchez to gather up all the information on all the events where the mayor thinks he was assaulted write up an affidavit for an arrest warrant and let’s go test it in court. I’ll bring all my pictures from each event and let a jury decide. I would welcome the opportunity to cross-examine Chávez. A restraining order could also be tested in court and Chávez could be made to testify to the allegations used to apply for such an order.

I had to photograph the lighting event from an unacceptable distance.

As Chávez returned to the highway with his officer-driver, Sanchez went to move an orange barrel.

Chávez stood in the open door of his SUV and yelled at Sanchez about me, “Didn’t he use to be a police officer? Finished his career the way he started it…”, a car went by and muffled what he said next. When I could hear him again Chávez was laughing.

Act Three: Actually a differed prologue.

A couple of weeks ago I had lunch with the mayor. Ok, I had lunch in the same room at the Standard Diner, not the same table.

Chávez was with a group that included former Governor Toney Anaya who is coordinating the Federal stimulus money coming to New Mexico. I was with a number of journalistic colleagues. When I arrived the owner noticed my camera and said please don’t harass the mayor. It seems one of my group was recognized and when told the mayor was present, had joked that he got in the mayor’s face regularly. So, the owner was concerned and our independent joking was not appreciated. I noticed the two officers that would be at AHS sitting a couple of booths from us and across the room from the politicos. Holmes passed our table and one of my buddies told me that he had given me a hard stare. I had not seen it because I had my back to him.

At one point, Chávez got up and walked towards our table having spotted the broadcaster, but turned away, walking around another table when he saw me. My friends noticed and told me they thought it weird.


My Take

The man making the obscene gesture at the top of this post is Albuquerque Police Department's Mayor’s Protection Detail Detective Aaron Holmes. You’ve met him before when he threw me out of a news conference a year ago. See that post here.

Holmes, above left, was in the crowd of guests and press waiting to attend Democratic Party presidential candidate Barack Obama's visit to the main public library.

It’s not the first time someone from the Mayor’s Protection Detail has flipped me off. I initially took it as a sign of endearment. I immediately thought that it was as uncool as it was, I would simply send the picture to Chief Ray Schultz and tell him, you deal with this before I deal with this.
It wasn’t the first time someone from this detail had indicated that I was number one. Sgt. Sanchez and I have taken each others pictures in what I considered a fun exchange. It might have been taken for the detail’s intelligence file, to show temporarily assigned officers who Bralley is.

As a former police union president and representative at many officers’ disciplinary actions, I am loath to file a complaint against a brother officer. However, just like when I was on the job, there is a line that I would not allow any officer to cross. The action went beyond the pale when APS responded to throw MacQuigg and me off campus by Officer Schaefer. Schaefer said an administrator, later identified as Gonzales, soft confirmed he learned from the mayor’s entourage that, “we were not the media.”

Whether Holms or his unidentified partner made the comment or whether it was Chávez or James who told Gonzales, both officers have a duty and an obligation to uphold the constitutional rights of journalists, any and all journalists, whether a politician considers their reporting as good, bad, fair or unfair.

I sent Albuquerque Police Department's Public Information Officer John Walsh, above, an attached photo of the second officer, requesting his identity. I contacted him by phone a couple of days later. Walsh had not checked his e-mail in the preceding days. He said he would attempt to identify the officer and would get back in touch. Consistent with his past practices, Walsh did not get back to me.

It’s been 35 years since I provided personal security when I worked as a courtroom security deputy for Prince George’s Maryland’s Sheriff’s Department. However, one thing that I learned and would later teach had to do with remaining emotionally detached from your law enforcement duties. Loyalty must be to the principle over ideologue over personality. The force of Chávez’ personality has subsumed the mayor’s protection detail and the officers are trying to protect him from politics rather than physical threat. Thirty-five years may sound like a long time, but human nature has changed very little over the millennia.

Ambivalence is a crucial part of the protection effort. When an officer’s sense of loyalty is compromised and they are willing to indulge the political paranoia of the protected individual, their ability to remain objective is a crack in the invisible cloak and can become a distraction that might be capitalized upon by real physical threats.

It’s past time for the chief to make a wholesale housecleaning of the Mayoral Protection Detail Detectives.


As for the distance factor with the mayor, different people have different comfort zones. Chávez’ claim that he is uncomfortable with me must have to do with it being me as he will stand close to and often surrounds himself with political allies and subordinates at many of his staged photo opportunities. He clearly doesn’t mind people being close.

During the last political campaign season, I worked on a personal project for a self-promotion piece.

In amassing photos of various candidates and politicians eyes, I’ve never gotten such a close up shot of Chávez. Most of the pictures I took for this project were taken over the shoulder of other journalist from a distance of no less than five feet.

Note: A Joe Monahan type free lunch contest to the first person that accurately identifies all nine. Contest not open to Joe Monahan, or anyone associated with any of those pictured. They were all taken during the past few years on New Mexico’s political scene. Yes, there is a trick embedded in the question.

I have been close to Chávez on two occasions, both at the University of New Mexico. During the 2003 Democratic Party’s first debate by declared candidates for their party's presidential nomination at Popejoy Hall, Chávez confronted a number of Gen. Wesley Clark supporters. I moved in close to Chávez to juxtapose him next to the demonstrators. He noticed a camera and started to pose at which time I lowered my camera. He recognized me, disengaged from the group mid sentence, walked away and said, ”It’s the guy.” This was the closest that I have moved on Chávez. He has moved closer to me.

The second event, Aug. 21, 2007, Chávez and University President David Schmidly, announced that ABQ Ride busses would provide students free rides to campus. After the mayor and Schmidly took questions from a KUNM Reporter, Chávez walked by me very closely. There was adequate room between the bus and me, however he walked into my personal space. I did not move my feet, but as my auto focus lens slammed to the minimum focus distance I leaned backwards to keep him in focus and take his picture.

Chávez spoke to Sanchez, right, telling him, “This guy’s problems…” and it was the first time I heard that “He is afraid of you,” according to both Sanchez and Spokeswoman James. I was not allowed on the bus with the other members of the media.

Sanchez told me that he downloaded the similar picture that appeared in the posting because he liked it so much and has it at his desk. I was closer to Sanchez than Chávez and he had no problem.

I tend not to crowd Chávez for two other reasons: he's not very tall; if I get too close, my camera angle will be pointed slightly downward extenuating his height, and because he has bald spots, it's just not kind.

According to the Nikon website the long lens I use as my standard telephoto is the AF Zoom-NIKKOR 80-200mm f/2.8D ED. Its minimum focus distance is 4.9 ft. (1.5m) and its dimensions are 3.4x7.4in. (diameter x length).

My standard wide angle to short telephoto zoom lens I use is the AF-S DX Zoom-NIKKOR 17-55mm f/2.8G IF-ED. Its minimum focus distance is 1.18 ft. (.36m) or a little more than 14 inches and its dimensions are 3.4x4.4in. (diameter x length).

Maybe I’ll just have to bring my 800mm lens to the next outdoor event and stand off beyond its 26-foot minimum focus distance to make a working portrait of Chávez. Then he couldn’t claim that I was up in his face and still get the wrinkles around his eyes, his receding hairline and show him as he really is.

Chávez has displayed no problems during events when he is with other more senior politicians. He only asserts himself when he is in control. I have been present without issue with major politicians including: President Barack Obama and when he was both his Party’s nominee and earlier as a candidate for nomination,

with former President Bill Clinton, Sen. Hilary Clinton,

with Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, in white shirt, at a Patricia Madrid for Congress rally,

Denver Mayor Fredrico Pena,

with Gov. Bill Richardson, and the New Mexico Democratic Dem. Congressional delegation.

Detective Holms, right, said nothing nor made any kind of movement or gesture,

even when at one point I sat at Chávez' feet,

and at New Mexico Democratic Party gatherings.

Chávez, above left, cheerleading Sen. Hilary Clinton at her Saturday Feb. 2, 2008 rally; right, he introduced Obama Aug. 18, at the main public library.

Chávez' security detail has never expressed any fear about me.

It is not uncommon for an officer providing security to place themself between the threat and the protected person. However, seldom is that the case ever since I first heard Chávez say that I was a “trouble maker.”

So the reasonable question is why does he feel more secure amongst the luminaries? Could it be that because the major politicos don’t know me or worry about coverage from anyone, that he won’t embarrass them by making a scene? If Chávez doesn’t feel his security detail is capable of assuaging his fears, maybe it’s time to get bigger individuals who engender greater confidence.


As for the Albuquerque Public Schools’ personnel and in particular Albuquerque High School employees, they were unwittingly taken in by the slander of the mayor’s group that we were not media.

Principal McCorkle was gracious, even if he was unaware of what impropriety was being done under his authority.

AHS Activity Director Gonzales and APS Police Officer Schaefer’s approach of ordering us to leave before determining facts from their own independent investigations makes them rubes; simple tools of the mayor.

Schaefer’s fellow APS officer, whose identity I was unable to establish, appropriately covered him. She clearly was uncomfortable by the unnecessarily confrontational interaction Schaefer engaged in. She left and went about her business as soon as possible after we were escorted to the office. Schaefer never even asked us our names.

APS security and police personnel failed to comply with policy, especially, “With this authority comes constitutional and statutory responsibilities and limitations.” Schaefer’s move was not based on all the available facts. The selective enforcement and excuse that we did not have a visitor’s pass fails because there was not a single visitor’s pass displayed by anyone else at the press conference.

School Police Authority

School Police officers are certified and commissioned law enforcement officers with comparable police authority to the Albuquerque Police Department’s officers and the Bernalillo County Sheriff’s Department’s deputies. As such, they have the authority to make arrests. With this authority comes constitutional and statutory responsibilities and limitations. The decision to arrest lies solely with the officer who will or will not make the arrest based upon the facts known to the officer at the time. Generally, a police officer cannot arrest for a violation of a misdemeanor which does not occur in his/her presence.

APS Security Aide McGee was inside my personal space as she escorted us to the parking lot. She seemed to be trying to step on my heels except when she was distracted by two incidents involving students.

The aide had no sense of personal safety as she put herself in a position of possible attack. It wouldn’t happen with me, but I can envision some high school ruffian being ordered around by her gruff mannerisms turning on her and cleaning her clock.

Armenta shuts down communications by requiring APS employees to direct all questions to her and then, though she instructs them to say she is crafting a response, doesn’t.

Chávez has reason to be concerned with my photography. It’s not particular to him, but by the way I photograph politicians, I zero in on them and any self perceived flaws maybe enhanced by my concentration.

As I have readily admitted, Chávez is not my favorite politician. He intentionally tried to damage my police career by moving me from the video production unit at the police academy and assigning me to a civilian entry-level records clerk job.

He later was very angry when, as part of the police union’s efforts, I successfully advocated defeating the quarter percent “Public Safety tax.” Here he is with then City Councillor Steve Gallegos and Chief Joe Polisar when Chávez called upon citizens to vote for the tax on his GOV-TV Governmemtn Cable Access Channel.

I also did some investigative work for one of the groups that brought charges against Chávez in the ABQPAC Ethics Board hearings. He is seen here with his then wife, Margaret Aragon de Chávez and her brother Robert Aragon.

They are attending a City Council meeting that sent the ethics charges to the City's internal Ethics Board rather than to the District Attorney.

ABQPAC was formed in part to fund travel expenses for Aragon de Chávez to travel with the mayor on business trips.

If one reviews my published photographs of Chávez, however one would be hard pressed to say that I haven’t fairly captured the wide range of expression and emotions he displays.

Note: A correction was made in the identification of the above photograph. I misidentified Margaret Aragon de Chávez' brother, former State Senator Robert Aragon, as John Wertheim, who would become State Democratic Party Chairman. My apologies, thanks to Michelle Meaders for catching the error and current State Democratic Party Chairman Brian Colón for the proper identification.

Memorial Day 2009

What’s Wrong With This Picture?


...and to honor all the others.

Ethics? This Isn’t Your Lousy Cup of Coffee Kind of Gratuity

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

With New Mexico in the center of pay-for-play allegations, it seems one can now go to school to learn more.

A group of information technology vendors who provide services to the Albuquerque Public Schools hosted about 40 technology employees to a questionable “APS Technology Appreciation Dinner” at Garduno’s on the Green May 14. A mariachi band entertained the assembled crowd.

I’m “concerned for myself and my fellow workers” about whether accepting the offered free drinks and dinner, raises ethical questions according to a concerned APS employee, who wishes to remain anonymous.

The employee received a forwarded e-mail invitation for a dinner and drinks event which included door prizes and a 12-inch laptop computer to be given away.

The source said the he didn’t think his colleagues understood why this was wrong.

Technology Integration Group Account Executive Jim Lujan wrote a May 8 e-mail to APS Director of Technology Client Services Ken Cole. Cole generated his own e-mail to over 100 APS Techs and others attaching TIG’s RSVP invitation. TIG’s electronic flier was adorned with two “APS Apple” logos. The text read, in part, that the event was open to “…all Tech Coordinators, TCS employees, Technology minded Principals and those who help make APS Technology a better and improving part of our schools!”

The TIG flier seems to violate APS policy:

Distributing or Posting Promotional Literature

Informational and Promotional Literature

The group must agree to the following:
When material is approved to be distributed through the APS inter-office mail, the group must comply with guidelines developed by the CRO and the division of Office Services. Those guidelines may change without notice depending on the CRO and Office Services division work load.

Unacceptable Materials

The following materials are unacceptable:

D. Advertisement of a product or service for sale or rent unless otherwise specified.

For Profit Organizations and Companies
Representatives of companies or individuals seeking access to staff members, students or parents for the purpose of selling or marketing any goods or services must request a letter of authorization from the Community Relations Office or from Curriculum Support for course-related materials, programs, or products. The letter does not imply an endorsement of any product/service.

The concern is that the vendors are making gifts and gratuities available to APS staffers who use and service their products, and who are required to make evaluations, recommendations and needs assessments of the equipment as a part of their official duties. Offering or taking gratuities may violate APS policy and State procurement code restrictions on taking gifts or even possibly bribing a public employee, a felony.

Technology Integration Group Account Executive Jim Lujan, who coordinated the event, was surprised to hear that someone considered what they were doing a breach of ethics. His first concern was that he wanted to know the source of the complaint. He didn’t believe anyone could think there was anything wrong with what they were doing.

“We had no decision makers present,” Lujan said in an interview.

Most attendees were tech coordinators, teachers, and educational assistants, who receive no thanks and make little to no money, Lujan said.

Lujan said the door-prizes were donated by the vendors. The top prize, a Dell laptop computer was a used demo model. It had an original retail value of $300 and was won by a teacher.

Lujan did not know exactly how many APS employees and their families attended or how much the event cost, but promised to get back with those numbers. At posting, he had not communicated those numbers.

The mariachi band was hired because one of its member's was a teacher, Lujan said.

“It only applies to the purchasing officer and has a $50 limit,” APS’ Director of the Community Relations Office and Spokesman Rigo Chavez said in an interview about the possible violation of APS' purchasing policy.

Chavez was asked to cite the section of the APS policy he claims says that there is a $50 limit only applying to procurement officers. He could not cite the section. He then misidentified the state statute section applying to the contract requirement when asked about the sections pertaining to: bribery of public officer or public employee, demanding or receiving bribe by public officer or public employee, the definition of gratuity, and how it applies to the language required in the contract. Chavez stated he was not an attorney and would only speak to APS policy.

APS’ purchasing policy directly references State Statute Chapter 13 Pamphlet 29 NMSA 1978, entitled "Public Purchases and Property." The policy requires that the state law against bribes; gratuities and kickbacks by contractors be included in every contract. The statute reads:

13-1-191. Bribes; gratuities and kickbacks; contract reference required.

All contracts and solicitations therefor shall contain reference to the criminal laws prohibiting bribes, gratuities and kickbacks.

The other pertinent statutes read:

30-24-1. Bribery of public officer or public employee.

Bribery of public officer or public employee consists of any person giving or offering to give, directly or indirectly, anything of value to any public officer or public employee, with intent to induce or influence such public officer or public employee to:
A. give or render any official opinion, judgment or decree;

B. be more favorable to one party than to the other in any cause, action, suit, election, appointment, matter or thing pending or to be brought before such person;

C. procure him to vote or withhold his vote on any question, matter or proceeding which is then or may thereafter be pending, and which may by law come or be brought before him in his public capacity;

D. execute any of the powers in him vested; or

E. perform any public duty otherwise than as required by law, or to delay in or omit to perform any public duty required of him by law.

Whoever commits bribery of public officer or public employee is guilty of a third degree felony.

13-1-59. Definition; gratuity.

"Gratuity" means a payment, loan, subscription, advance, deposit of money, service, or anything of more than nominal value, received or promised, unless consideration of substantially equal or greater value is exchanged.

The dictionary defines appreciation as gratitude. So the appreciation dinner could be considered a form of gratuity.

30-24-2. Demanding or receiving bribe by public officer or public employee.

Demanding or receiving bribe by public officer or public employee consists of any public officer or public employee soliciting or accepting, directly or indirectly, anything of value, with intent to have his decision or action on any question, matter, cause, proceeding or appointment influenced thereby, and which by law is pending or might be brought before him in his official capacity.

Whoever commits demanding or receiving bribe by public officer or public employee is guilty of a third degree felony, and upon conviction thereof such public officer or public employee shall forfeit the office then held by him.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

It’s not the first scrape with the law for Promethean, an English company with its U.S. base in Atlanta. Promethean makes what they call interactive whiteboards, above. Their products replace blackboards with a computer based classroom system.

Promethean played a critical role in a major procurement code violation scandal earlier this year in the Tucson Unified School District. TSUD settled with the Arizona Attorney General.

At least three high-level school officials, including the Chief Operations Officer, Curriculum Director, and the Chief Technology Officer were placed on leave for procurement code violations according to the Tucson Citizen.Their names are no longer listed on the TSUD staff webpage.

The local office of TIG is lead vendor for other suppliers of high tech equipment that have joined Promethean in throwing the party. The other vendors are: Dell, Axiom Memory, Xiotech, Xerox, and Absolute Software.

Some of the same vendors have held similar events before. Last year there was another “APS Technology Appreciation Dinner” Dec 16, 2008, at The Samurai restaurant. “It’s been going on for at least two years,” the source said, once last December and again the year before that; also in December. The employee, who refuses to attend such events, said that over 100 APS technology employees were sent the e-mail and he expected the event to be packed.

Lujan said he has been an APS vendor for four years and communicates with Cole on a daily basis.

“I did not know about that,” Lujan said, when asked if he had received a letter required by APS policy for “When material is approved to be distributed through the APS inter-office mail…”

When asked about the use of the APS Apple logo, he said that he downloaded off the APS website and did not know it might violate APS policy.

Because Lujan had not received the required letter of authorization from the Community Relations Office or from Curriculum Support, he was unaware “The letter will clearly state that APS is not endorsing the services, products, or programs….”

Distributing or Posting Promotional Literature

Informational and Promotional Literature

The group must agree to the following:
When material is approved to be distributed through the APS inter-office mail, the group must comply with guidelines developed by the CRO and the division of Office Services. Those guidelines may change without notice depending on the CRO and Office Services division work load.

Unacceptable Materials

The following materials are unacceptable:

D. Advertisement of a product or service for sale or rent unless otherwise specified. (See Fund Raisers and Advertising/Promotional Material).

For Profit Organizations and Companies

Representatives of companies or individuals seeking access to staff members, students or parents for the purpose of selling or marketing any goods or services must request a letter of authorization from the Community Relations Office or from Curriculum Support for course-related materials, programs, or products. The letter does not imply an endorsement of any product/service.

The company/organization representatives must submit copies of all materials to be submitted to the schools with their request for a letter of authorization. The letter will clearly state that APS is not endorsing the services, products, or programs unless the materials are part of a district textbook adoption. The organization will be directed to contact the principal or designee before contacting staff members.

No direct access to school employees will be granted during school hours. The principal may, but is not obligated to, allow representatives the opportunity to contact staff members after school hours on school property. In such cases, the normal facility rental fees will apply.

When read the state law of demanding or receiving bribe by public officer or public employee, accepting, directly or indirectly, anything of value, Lujan said that is why they don’t even send Christmas cards. Though he reiterated that no decision makers were present, he emphasized those in attendance, use our equipment and ”call us for support.”

At least one vendor has run afoul of the law. The Anti Trust Unit of the Office of the Attorney General, State of Arizona, implicated Promethean, along with other vendors in a report released Jan. 13, 2009, entitled, “Investigative Report Regarding the Procurement Practices of the Tucson Unified School District.”

The investigation revealed:

Two vendors conspired with each other, and the District employees. To ensure each obtained a District contract, harming competition and violating State antitrust laws, the school procurement code and District policies and the USAC’s E-Rate Program.

District personnel, including District leaders and key decision makers, accepted gifts and gratuities from current and prospective vendors, including gift cards, meals and lodging at a Tucson area resort.

Promethean provided more than $2 million worth of equipment to TUSD and gave gifts, gratuities, food, drink, entertainment, and accommodations to school employees, in addition to waiving fees at two seminars for which the school district provided one school location without a lease or insurance.

The AG’s report found:

Promethean’s gifts and gratuities to the district and its employees create a conflict of interest.

In the TUSD’s settlement with the Arizona Attorney General, Promethean was not specifically named.

Additional questions forwarded to the Arizona Attorney General's Press Secretary Anne Hilby have not been answered at the time of this posting.

Some APS Board members have publicly taken such gratuities themselves, most recently when a quorum of the board attended a vendor sponsored “Administrative Conference on Education” training event at the Inn of the Mountain Gods. Not only is it a procurement code violation, but it also violated the open meetings act.

My Take

I agree with the anonymous APS technical employee that his fellow workers have no idea why their acceptance of the invitation to the “Appreciation Dinner” is not only an ethical breach, but a violation of APS’ Policy and the State Law by accepting “…directly or indirectly… anything of value...”

The invitation itself has two problems: the APS Apple logo appears twice and there is no statement that “APS is not endorsing the services, products, or programs.”

Rigo Chavez, right, was unprepared to answer questions pertaining to policy or law. Instead of saying he needed to do further research or even consult with the legal adviser, he went into defensive spin mode.

TIG’s Lujan should have known the requirements of contracting; it’s called due diligence.

However, more importantly, the APS employees that Lujan contacted and have the responsibility to implement the vendors contracts have as much responsibility to follow the policies and assure that the vendor’s do not stray into prohibited areas.

It’s pretty clear that no one is reading the rules and maybe some “rules” are being made up as they go along.

With he federal stimulus money coming, technology items like whiteboards are surely to be considered. The end user and support persons who were invited to the TIG event may play a critical role is recommending purchase decisions.

It's Jim's Turn

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This is Jim Spiri. He is a war photographer, among other things. He has spent a fair amount of time in the current war zones.

I first met Spiri at the State Republican Convention in Las Cruces June 14, 2008, when he escorted, retired U.S. Air Force Colonel George E. "Bud" Day.

Day was representing soon to be GOP Presidential nominee Sen. John McCain as the featured surrogate-speaker.

You've met him before.

He also was the local McCain campaign photographer; his major duty was to get pictures of the welcoming committee with the Senator.

Spiri’s secondary duty seemed to be getting in the way of other photographers by blocking their view. It wasn’t really a duty; it’s just what he did.

I got my pictures, in spite of him.

He also was very helpful with information from the McCain camp about visits.

Spiri writes articles that appear in Captain’s Journal.

He has a compelling story about his two sons.

Spiri, white shirt, with his wife Candace, to his right, attended President Barack Obama’s visit to Rio Rancho High School.

Chris Lardner introduced President Obama with a story about how, through an error, not of her making, caused her credit card company raised her interest rates from 9.24 percent to 30 percent.

Her story maybe typical, but it was also carefully selected because, it did not contain an element of making a personal choice of misusing her card. Through an error with her daughter's university, the school continued to make withdrawals against her card, triggering the credit change. Many credit strapped people have made financial decisions to pay some item on time while holding back other payments as if there were no obligation. The President acknowledged the dilemma.

"You all know what Chris is talking about." Obama said, " I know. I remember. It hasn't been that long since I had my credit card, sometimes working that a little bit."

"I also think there's no doubt that people need to accept, as I said before, responsibility that comes with holding a credit card. This is not free money. It's debt. " Obama went to say, "And you shouldn't take on more than you can handle. We expect consumers to make sound choices and live within their means and pay what they owe in a timely manner."

Spiri wrote the following last Thursday about the visit.

He asked for the space and I offer him this posting as a guest commentator.

I wouldn’t normally repost, but it’s worth the read locally and it serves as a platform to show my picture from the event.

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S VISIT TO RIO RANCHO, NM

Today is May 14, 2009. President Obama came to visit Rio Rancho, NM and hold a kind of “town hall meeting” of sorts. I did not vote for Mr. Obama, however, I felt compelled to go and be present at his visit. There was no way I could obtain a ticket so I contacted the Governor’s office and explained that my son is currently on his fifth deployment to the war zone and that we had lost our older son, eight years ago, who was a US Marine. In short order, I received two tickets to attend. I wanted to speak directly to the Governor and the President, but, that would not happen on this day. Maybe some day in the future it will, we’ll see.

As for my take on the so called “town hall” meeting, I have some comments to make. Let me firstly say, Mr. Obama is all of our Commander in Chief, so, no matter what we think politically, left or right, Mr. Obama is the one who now controls my son’s destiny at war. My son has now served under three Presidents in his nine year career as an Army aviator. So I have a stake in what the current Commander in Chief has to say. But what did this new Commander in Chief have to say today here in New Mexico…?

Observing the crowd, and listening to what was being said both verbally and non-verbally (body language), it seemed as though all I heard from the crowd was, “Mr. Obama, please pay off my credit card bills and please pay off my house mortgage. We’ve been too irresponsible to do it ourselves and you promised to give us all this free stuff….” That is what it sounded like to me. But I kept my mouth shut. I am always considerate of my surroundings, wherever I am at any given moment.

In all fairness to Mr. Obama, he said one thing I agreed with. Credit cards are not free money. Duh……However, for some reason the people in the audience today, almost 3000 of them, seemed to think it is the governments’ job to pay their credit card bills. No wonder they think that, we’ve seen the current administration bail out big time bankers to the tune of trillions of dollars and rising, so, perhaps it is only fitting that the average dumbed-down New Mexican should think the same about their personal credit card debt…..What a country…!

I find it really tough to be in the crowd of 3000 whiny New Mexicans complaining about how deep in debt they got themselves in while at the same time I have to worry about my son flying combat helicopter missions in Iraq, again, protecting the rights of these New Mexicans to ask for more free money from Mr. Obama. I remember back, exactly eight years ago to the day, when my other son, 2nd Lt. Jesse James Spiri, USMC was operated on for a serious medical situation and was told he would die and that his government would not spend one dime to help him. And he was a United States Marine Officer. I think there is something wrong with this picture. Now granted, this did not happen on Mr. Obama’s watch, but what is currently happening on Mr. Obama’s watch is this. Our nation is even the more so at war now in the middle east and my younger son is there again. And he would go another five times if called upon. He, like is father, is a true patriot. If the Commander in Chief says, “jump”, we both say “how high?”

But…Mr. Obama wanted to talk about New Mexican’s credit card debt, not my son at war, today. I was almost called upon, but Mr. Obama chose his questioners carefully. He did not call upon anyone that looked like me. Rather he chose to call on people that were in unions, worked for the Congressman’s office from district 3, etc. He should have called on me. I would have asked him this question…

“Mr. Obama, when you are finished paying off the credit card debts of all these irresponsible New Mexicans, and bailing out all those fat cats on Wall Street and their banker friends, will there be any money left to continue the maintaining of the CH47 helicopter fleet the Army is using whose funds you have scheduled to cut? My son has served his country on five deployments in the war zones of the middle east and there is talk that cuts in the Chinook helicopter community is imminent. You have asked my son to fight the country’s wars and he has done so valiantly, but now, you have his helicopters on the chopping blocks so these irresponsible New Mexicans who cannot seem to stay away from Wal-Mart and Best Buy, want you to take care of them, while they scream against those fighting for our freedom and safety…What’s up with that..?” I would ask.

But, Mr. Obama did not call upon me. Maybe he knew who I was. Maybe he knew what I would ask. I’m not sure. But I know this, when he asks my son to go to war, as my son has just done, two weeks ago, I am forced to say, “Amen”, again.

Today, I saw Mr. Obama and heard him speak. Many say how smart he is, how intellectual he is. I found him rather boring today. Oh, he knew a little about how to talk to a crowd, but, on this day, there was nothing really earth shattering that he said that struck a chord with me. He is still my Commander in Chief. I respect his position. But I am not impressed with his talk today. He didn’t say anything relevant to things I’m concerned about. Once before, my government told me there was not enough money to take care of my son, a Marine. Now, my government is telling me there is plenty of money to bail out bankers and New Mexicans that cannot pay their credit card bill from Wal Mart. But my government is not saying anything about taking care of the helicopters my younger son is flying in war to give these irresponsible New Mexicans the freedom to ask the current Commander in Chief for some money to pay their credit cards off.

I’m not impressed. But I will still salute the current Commander in Chief and pray that my son will be safe in his helicopter while at war.

Jim Spiri can be reached at jimspiri@yahoo.com

It’s Everywhere, It’s Everywhere!

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Just over five years ago, April 7, 2004, U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia gave a speech at Presbyterian Christian High School in Hattiesburg, Miss. U.S. Deputy Marshal Melanie Rube, working the Southern District of Mississippi – Hattiesburg, forced Associated Press Writer Denise Grones, working out of the Jackson, Miss. bureau, and Hattiesburg American’s Reporter Antoinette Konz to erase their recordings of Scalia’s remarks.

The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press complained to Justice Scalia who wrote letters of apology to the reporters. He stated that the Marshal had misunderstood his personal policy regarding the press.

Scalia’s personal policy is not based on a particular dislike of the press, but says he tries not to become part of the political process, that attaches to the other two branches of government; legislative and executive. He wishes to avoid being seen as news. Of course he is news; he is one of the nine most powerful people in the United States, through the judicial branch. What he says and thinks is of tremendous interest to the citizenry, whether he thinks it should go beyond his court writings, or not. Scalia rarely allows radio and television coverage of his events.

The paper and AP, on behalf of their reporters, sued the federal government and several months later the Justice Department admitted wrongdoing and settled for the demanded amount. One question was left to the court on injunctive relief.

Apparently Federal Marshal Rube does good work on the fugitive side, Only a year later she was the contact Deputy when a Mississippi Drug Kingpin, David Tyree Warner, AKA “Super Dave” or “Mississippi Dave” was added to U.S. Marshals 15 Most Wanted List. He was captured in Mexico with in three months.

She wasn’t held personally liable. Hopefully, her supervisor had a comment for her and that there was retraining or at least a memo clarifying the DOJ’s policy on obtaining evidence from the news media which is spelled out in section 9-13.400 News Media Subpoenas; Subpoenas for Telephone Toll Records of News Media; Interrogation, Arrest, or Criminal Charging of Members of the News Media.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Here Come the Judge, Tue. April 14

Justice Scalia came to the University of New Mexico and spoke to several law school classes. He gave a public presentation cosponsored by the Federalist Society and UNM School of Law in the afternoon. He was introduced by Law School Dean Leo Romero.

Ground rules were set; reporters could record Scalia for note taking purposes only. Two photo opportunities were scheduled: the first and last two minutes of his speech.

Security existed, as equipment was checked by Albuquerque Police and the press was directed to a common area.

Police and U.S. Marshals were low-key; recorders were permitted, and two minutes after stepping to the podium the University’s press minder rounded up the photographers.

The last two-minute photo opportunity did not happen as the cue for it to begin, the Dean's announcement, became a thank you and Scalia left the stage.

President Ronald Reagan appointed Scalia to the Supreme Court in 1986, when William Rehnquist was elevated to Chief Justice upon the retirement of Warren E. Burger. He is now the second senior member of the court, behind John Paul Stevens.

Scalia spoke of being a believer in interpreting the Constitution through textualism and originalism, as opposed to the theory of a “Living Constitution.”

He is an eloquent and passionate speaker. In the absence of an opposing view, one could be swayed to believe him correct. I am not about to match wits with the man, though he is not my favorite judge. He claims to be a textual and original proponent, but doesn’t always practice it.

Scalia made two unrelated points that struck me hard.

He talked about efforts to have the death penalty declared unconstitutional by the court. He calls it, “My court,” rather than the court upon which “I” sit.

Scalia spoke about the 14th Amendment's language “…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law….” He placed strong emphasis on “life” as meaning a government may take a life after due process, specifically meaning that the death penalty is Constitutional. Life and due process also appear in the Fifth Amendment.

He attacked the living Constitution argument, that times change and the Constitution should change with the times. Scalia is concerned that the current court is at a 5-4 juncture where the swing of a single vote could render the death penalty unconstitutional. He said if that happened, “game over," it would be gone, never to return.

That’s when I had a sudden urge for a drink. Peculiar, because I don’t drink, but more telling as thoughts of the 18th Amendment, prohibition and the 21st Amendment lifting prohibition ran through my mind.

From a practical matter, should Scalia’s court rule the plain language of the Constitution unconstitutional, eliminating death, nothing prohibits passage of a new Constitutional amendment imposing the death penalty again

New Mexico recently banned the death penalty in favor of sentences of life without the possibility of parole, without addressing the constitutionality of the question. Constitutionally it's still available, just not used.

The other point came in the question and answer period. A gentleman rose and asked an abortion related question. Why didn’t the Supreme Court consider abortion murder?

Scalia obviously had been down this path before, as he stopped the man from giving a speech. He's heard many cases, be they called abortion rights, right to life, or reproductive health cases, during his tenure.

Scalia cited the 13th Amendment’s, “Neither Slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime…” then went back to the Constitution’s, “three-fifths of all other Persons…” clause on how to determine Representatives and taxation; summing up that the drafters were talking about “walking around persons,” and did not intend it to mean that pregnant women got counted as two.

Contrary to the question from one of my anti-abortion friends; was Scalia pro abortion? No, not necessarily, he was just not going to count a fetus as a person using the Constitution’s way of counting.


The Tea Party, Wed. April 15

I wasn’t invited, but that was how it was set up.

Liberal bloggers seemed intent on suggesting that the effort was a partisan effort organized by some FOX News commentator. I must not have been paying attention because if there was an underlying message, I missed it. Since then, I haven’t caught up.

I’ve covered a lot of demonstrations, marches, protests, and even a few riots; tea party day just didn’t mesh.

I drove east on Montgomery Boulevard and there were a smattering of sign carriers, but the protetors seemed removed, maybe even oblivious to being in front of the Internal Revenue Service offices just east of San Mateo Boulevard. This was part of a small group at San Pedro.

It was tax day, April 15, and many signs seemed to allude to where taxes were spent. Unlike anti-war protests, where the tax spending question is often posed with sayings like, “Schools not Bombs,” these signs referenced, that at current tax rates, “Economic Stimulus” money would accrue to protestors’ children and grandchildren.

Near the end of the couple of hour rally, I met a man who had told his boss he was going to the tea party event with the possibility of being arrested.

I can’t stop laughing! The idea that a conservative goes to a rally believing they could get arrested, while those at the other end of the political spectrum go to their rallies thinking they won’t get arrested.

I’m not sure I can ever remember going to a right-wing rally before, that wasn’t based on the presence of a politician. It’s not their way. Why they think they make a point was left in the din of an uncoordinated effort. It was all noise – no message.

There were no speeches, no catchy, “Hell No We Won’t Go.” No, it was a, make-your-own sign, bring-your-own-agenda, unless you brought one from some talk radio guy, reduced to a hastily hand written slogan on cheap poster board.

There were no leaders. There was a rabble, just no rousers.

The media was out, sound bites were obtained, but it had the feel of a tea party, not a destroy three shiploads of tea that were subject to a tax in which those required to pay it had no say. No, these were not “Sons of Liberty,” they were more like a garden party set, where you stick your pinky finger in the air.

The closest to any acts of civil disobedience, I observed, were violations of the non-binding flag code and the seldom enforced, use of horn, traffic infraction.

Because standing on the sidewalk wasn’t enough for some, a cruising atmosphere took hold.

There were some dark sides; there were no baskets of rocks, but there was at least one visual racial reference by flying the confederate flag with an upside down American flag.

President Barack Obama, then 87 days into his administration, was the target of several signs. The protest also seemed to have an effect on business as the emissions testing shop closed after having no customers in the over crowded parking lot.

A number of visual attacks were made about the current financial crisis without placing blame on those in power when it started.

Now I didn’t expect many, if any, of these folks to attack the former administration, however, there was a disconnect with the sentiments on the street and reality.

Maybe it was just an outpouring of frustration, because the ballot box didn’t provide a satisfactory answer.
Was this an oblique reference to George W. Bush, our third President named George?

Not withstanding radio commentator Paul Gessing, second from left, who is the President of the Rio Grande Foundation and owner of Capitol Report New Mexico, for whom I provide photographs, said the economic problems belong to both parties. However, his position, along with his radio program’s co-host Jim Scarantino, right, may not have gotten to those standing on the sidewalks

My blogging buddy Peter St. Cyr covered the event with audio and his own pictures.

I’m pretty good at the metaphoric nuances, but I sure missed with this crowd.

There was a small contingent of police officers, which properly stood back as there was little to require any enforcement action.

This man thanked officers for the job they were doing. I overheard another man complain to officers that a Homeland Security Police vehicle had passed on Montgomery while videoing protesters. I glanced such a vehicle later, but from a distance and could not see a camera.

The other thing I saw was a couple of peddlers hawking their wares in the roadway.

At least this fellow had his safety vest on.

On September 21, 2001, protesters marched, starting at the University, went to Carlisle then returned to UNM. Near the end of the march when a few protestors stepped into the street, APD responded with lightening speed and harsh action, arresting several.

The preliminary supervisor, Sgt. Mark Garcia, above left, was jostled and he lost his glasses. His first statement as to what charges were being brought was, "enticement to riot." What he may have meant was, "incitement to riot." I wrote about it in: Police Neutrality at Anti-war Protests. The majority of the cases were later dismissed.

The point is that both sets of officers got it wrong. In 2001, the protestors, instead of being arrested, should have been protected from traffic, then encouraged to get back on the sidewalk. At Montgomery and Louisiana Boulevards, the officers should have gotten the vendors out of the street for the same safety reasons. Or, maybe they wasn't a particular safety hazard at either location.

However, we don’t want American flags run over, now do we.


What is “Ethics Reform: What Is Happening in Albuquerque?” Tue. April 21,

The New Mexico League of Women Voters posed the question, “Ethics Reform: What Is Happening in Albuquerque?”

NMLWV hosted former City of Albuquerque Attorney David Campbell, who served Mayors Martin Chávez and Jim Baca, from 1989 to 1993. His talk was about the City’s Charter Review Task Force and how suggested changes might impact the work of the group. Campbell chaired a similar task force 10 years ago.

Campbell, along with former City Councillor Herb Hughes, handing out information, both sit as Council appointees on the current Task Force.

My blogging buddy Ched MacQuigg, Diogenes' six, who is interested in ethics issues, was more than willing to go listen.

Unfortunately, he was extremely disappointed; “Ethics Reform” at the City doesn’t mean the same thing as MacQuigg’s definition. The City’s definition is about campaign finance reform and requiring every group, even as few as two people, to ask City permission through registration, before speaking about public issues.

MacQuigg is right, that isn’t ethics.


Let’s Ride the Elephant, Thu. April 23

The15 member City of Albuquerque’s Charter Review Task Force appointed by City Council and the Mayor, held its last meeting with a public discussion of a controversial issue that sparked intense debate.

The contentious issue was a proposed change to the existing Charter language, which currently reads:

Section 2. DEFINITIONS.
(k) “Measure Finance Committee” means a political committee or any person or combination of two or more persons acting jointly in aid of or in opposition to the effort of anyone seeking to have their name placed on the ballot for city office, a petition to place a measure on the ballot pursuant to Article III of this Charter, voter approval or disapproval of one or more measures on the ballot and/or the election to, or recall from, office of one or more candidates for office when such person or people have accepted contributions in excess of $250 or make expenditures in excess of $250 for any of the purposes listed heretofore.

(l) “Person” means any individual, cooperative association, club, corporation, company, firm, partnership, joint venture syndicate, profit or nonprofit organization, or other entity.

The proposed language was:

"Measure Finance Committee" means any corporation, partnership, limited liability partnership, limited liability company, political committee or any person or combination of two or more persons acting jointly to distribute any communication broadcasted via internet, by television or radio, printed in a newspaper or on a billboard, directly mailed or delivered by hand to personal residences or otherwise distributed within 120 days of any municipal election.

The City Council appointed former Bernalillo County District Court Judge Wendy York, above, to chair the Task Force.

Each of the nine Councillors appointed one task force member:
District one, Councilor Ken Sanchez appointed Laura Horton, who is vice president of the West Side Coalition of Neighborhoods. 


District two, Councilor Debbie O’Malley appointed Michael Passi, who is a retired Associate Director of Albuquerque’s Department of Family and Community Services. 





District three, Councilor Isaac Benton appointed Susan Jones, who was a former City planner for 13 years and is now a Bernalillo County planner in the public works development review department.

District four, Councilor Brad Winter appointed Herb Hughes, a former Albuquerque City Councilor and State Public Regulation Commission who also served on the city’s first charter review task force in 1971. 




District five, Councilor Michael Cadigan appointed UNM Law Professor Gloria Valencia-Weber. 





District six, Councilor Rey Garduño appointed Eli Il Yong Lee who is the Director of the Center of Civic Policy. 





District seven, Councilor Sally Mayer appointed Chuck Gara, who is a realtor and past chairman of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties. He served 
on the City’s Environmental Planning Commission. According to his biography he, “currently is a member of the Planned Growth Strategy Implementation Advisory Task Force.” This is a direct violation of City Ordinance:

Article 6: Public Boards, Commissions and Committees
§ 2-6-1-3 Membership.
The following shall govern the qualifications, appointment and conduct of members of the public boards, commissions and committees of the city;
(4) No person shall be a member of more than one public board, commission or committee at any one time.

Article 1: General Provisions
§ 1-1-99 General Penalty.
Any person who violates any provision of this code for which another penalty is not specifically provided shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine not exceeding $500 or by imprisonment not exceeding 90 days or both unless a different specific penalty is provided. Each separate violation shall constitute a separate offense and, upon conviction, each day of violation shall constitute a separate offense.

District eight, Councilor Trudy Jones appointed David Campbell, a former city attorney under the first Chávez administration. He was the chairman of the city’s charter review task force in 1998. Campbell is a member of the League of Women Voters and serves on the board of National Association of Industrial and Office Properties with fellow task force member Gara.

District nine, Councilor Dan Harris appointed David Standridge Jr., who is a local attorney and serves on the Bernalillo County Board of Registration. 


Mayor Chávez appointed five members:
Diana Dorn-Jones is a former Assistant Chief Administrative Officer who served during the second Chávez administration. She resigned to run for the City Council seat abandoned by Eric Griego when he ran against Chávez. Dorn-Jones lost to Isaac Benton.

Steve Gallegos is a former City Councillor and County Commissioner.

Dan Silva was an 11 term New Mexico State Representative for District 13 when appointed and a retired City government director.

Vickie Perea is a former City Councillor who retired from City government. She was the unsuccessful Republican candidate for the office of State Secretary of State.

Marty Esquivel is an attorney, has been a City’s Red Light Camera Administrative Hearing Officer and is an elected Albuquerque Public Schools Board Member. Esquivel was not in attendance and is shown here from an APS event.


City Staff at the Charter Review Task Force table included: Director of Council Services Laura Mason, Mayor’s Office Boards and Commissions, Constituent Services Coordinator Tony Pedroncelli, City Clerk Randy Autio, the Legal Department’s City Attorney Robert White and Assistant City Attorney Robert Kidd.

A dozen representatives of community groups spoke against the proposed changes. All claim, that as part of their greater mandate, of social good, they are educational and advocacy groups, which require organizing, lobbying and communicating with their members, contributors and each other in coalition building and engaging with similar groups in collective field strategies.

The speakers insist on calling themselves “non-profits.” Though accurate, their self-description is incomplete. Non-profits come in several varieties and the lumping of them together is an attempt to keep the public from distinguishing the differences. There are taxable and tax-exempt non-profits. Taxed groups may engage in political activities, including endorsing candidates. Tax-exempt groups formed under the Internal Revenue Service Code Rule 501 (c) 3 are prohibited from becoming politically involved.

Such groups contend their education and advocacy actions neither constitute impermissible acts under the IRS code nor are they political or electioneering.

However, many don’t see it that way, especially some politicians who have been subjected to what the groups claim are simply educational efforts. Here is an example of one of the fliers.

The State Attorney General Gary King, above, and Secretary of State Mary Herrera, right, have taken exception and required some groups to register.

The Lee led group of 501 (c) 3s have filed a suit in federal court trying to block the state's action.

Heath Haussamen posted the complaint. Haussamen also writes for the New Mexico Independent.

Except for the tax-exempt 501 (c) 3, most others groups, though still non-profits, are usually required to disclose their donor lists.

A particular group may be registered under IRS code with more than one classification for purposes of forwarding both their philanthropically funded social advocacy and as a political arm.

Representatives of these eleemosynary groups didn’t argue against the present City language, but attacked the changes as if they were something new and designed to specifically force them to comply.

The representatives speaking before the task force in opposition to the proposal argued that their activities as educational and advocacy groups naturally require communicating and claim that complying would not only hamper their ability to advocate but it would limit their contributions from donors who wish to remain anonymous.

Executive Director, Community Action New Mexico’s Ona Porter, and Mary Ellen Capek, Capek & Associates, a philanthropic and nonprofit research and consulting group, former Executive Director of the National Council for Research on Women, who also serve on the Aspen Institute's Nonprofit Sector Research Fund. Executive Director of Enlace Comunitario Claudia Medina, and Amigos Bravos Michael Jensen.

New Mexico Coalition to End Homelessness Policy and Advocacy Director Lisa LaBrecque, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Council 18, Political Action Representative Carter Bundy, Sarah Berger, law firm of Freedman, Boyd, Hollander, Bergman and Ives, and Cheryl Gooding, the owner of Gooding and Associates a consulting business that works with nonprofits.

Sacred Alliance for Grassroots Equality, (SAGE) Council, Laurie Weahkee, Board President of SouthWest Organizing Project (SWOP) Bineshi Albert, Executive Director American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of New Mexico, Peter Simonson, and Director Center for Equality and Rights Rachel LaZar.

New Mexico Chapter of the National Association of Industrial and Office Properties President Lynne Andersen, left, here in the audience with former City Councillor Nadyne Bicknell, was the sole supporter of the proposed changes, saying her organization supported getting big money out of local elections.

There were a number of spectators in the audience, including a contingent of League of Women Voters, who watched the issue and left at the discussion’s conclusion.

Matt Brix, Policy Director of the Center for Civic Policy, lobbyist for the Center for Civic Action and former Director of Common Cause New Mexico and a current board member.

Organizing Director, Center for Civic Policy, Antoinette Tellez-Humble who also sits on the Board of Directors of New Mexico Voices for Children.

Political Director, America Votes NM, Ariel Tamara Bickel.

Communications Director at Center for Civic Action Tracy Dingmann, a former writer for the Albuquerque Journal, she also writes for the New Mexico Independent. She wrote about the meeting for Clearly New Mexico.com, the blog of the CCA.

The task force members had a wide-ranging discussion about the proposal. The group is divisible into, what seems to be, different groups and can be classified in several ways that create differing dynamics. The following classifications are based on my best recollection. Several members can be classified into more than one sub group.

The lawyers: York, Campbell, Valencia-Weber, Standridge, and the missing Esquivel.

Former elected City Councillors: Hughes, Gallegos and Perea.

There are five former City bureaucrats: Silva, Dorn-Jones, Campbell, Passi, and Jones.

Two have played peripheral roles in the City system: Gara, and Esquivel.

Five participants haven’t been direct City actors: York, Valencia-Weber, Standridge, Horton and Lee.

Members who have been involved with other governments, in elected, appointed positions, or through employment, include: York, Valencia-Weber, Standridge, and Jones.

The task force members are all political appointees and their choices reflect the underlying political views of those making the selections. If you put a political filter over this group, you find only a few, that jump out as not being Democrats: Hughes, Perea and Standridge.


Task Force member Gara brought the measured finance committee issue forward. The debate focused on the appearance that there is a disparity in how some groups engaging in political and lobbying activities are required to register and report, while others claim their organizations are exempt by virtue of their federal tax-exempt status.

Gara held up the Albuquerque Journal with a picture of one of the mailers that were in question during the last election.

Supporters of Lee’s Center for Civic Policy and Center for Civic Action and their projects perceive the City and state legislative actions as illegal attacks on them.

The lawyers got deep into this issue fast. Campbell, a member of the League of Women Voters, believes the language could halt their activities, including the widely distributed Voter’s Guide.
Valencia-Weber described the proposal as unconstitutional and thought it might make a great constitutional law case study for her UNM class. Standridge said he normally disagreed with Lee, but on this issue he agreed.

The three former City Councillors suggested that Council already has authority to and had amended the Charter’s election code.

Lee said he had never been called an “Elephant in the room before,” alluding to Judge Geraldine Rivera’s comments in a recent case that the City’s administration engaged in politics for personal benefit. He was suggesting that the purpose of the proposal was to eliminate the efforts of his and similar organizations from engaging in their education and advocacy efforts.

Lee, center, was sitting next to Silva, to the left, who along with State Senators James Taylor and Shannon Robinson had sued over Lee and associated 501 (c) 3s efforts that successfully defeated them in last years election. The suit was dismissed on a motion of Lee and his fellow defendants.

Lee was upset that the issue might not be resolved quickly and could be subject to the debate of elected politicians. He said that if the measured finance question went back to the council, then he also wanted the independence of certain charter established mayoral appointed positions, specifically the city attorney, to be reviewed also.

It appears that Lee does not understand the power vested to him, in his role as a task force member. He has a right to file a minority report, on any issue, where he disagrees with the majority. He may not only file a minority report, but to talk before the council about the issues of concern. It’s rare for task force or committee members to file minority reports, but if one truly believes in their position, it is appropriate. Jones voiced a similar concern.

Contrary to New Mexico Independent's Trip Jenning's report, the vote was 9-4. Voting for were, clockwise above: Campbell Valencia-Weber, Dorn-Jones, Hughes, Silva, Perea, and Horton in the background.
Voting against were: Passi, Jones, Standridge, and Lee, with York abstaining and Esquivel, absent.

There was a media presence consisting of Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer Dan McKay, the 501 (c) 3 funded New Mexico Independent's Senior Writer Trip Jennings, at the end of the table, Reporter/blogger Gwyneth Doland, middle of the table, MacQuigg, right, and myself. We provided a video feed to NMI for live webcasting.

The feed failed at NMI's end and Doland used her small webcam and our audio feed. MacQuigg, and I are not compensated for providing video.

This meeting might have been broadcast over government cable access channel GOV 16 had it not been in conflict with a City Council meeting.

Councillors Rey Garduño and Michael Cadigan, who, as candidates, were clients of Soltari, Lee’s former business, a political consulting firm. They sat in on the close of the meeting, after attending an earlier City Council meeting. Garduño was also present before he attended the Council meeting.

My Take

The APD contingent assigned to the Scalia event with no more than 800 people, in the 2,300 seat Kiva Auditorium, rated at least 15 officers, plus the federal Marshals, while fewer than that hung out at the tea party.

There is nothing better in my book than a bunch of cops standing around with nothing better to do.

I have to ask, why does Scalia get to make the ground rules about who gets to cover him at a tax paid event? As one of the most powerful jurists in the world, what he says is news. How he thinks is of great interest to lawyers who arguge before him and for those who try to understand how laws and social issues work.

Why Scalia thinks there is sufficient enough interest in how he thinks, for him to write a book, "Making Your Case: The Art of Persuading Judges," with Bryan A. Garner, but not understand why that is not of public interest to be broadcast, or at least covered by radio and television. Such thinking is reason enough to be a perfect, "What’s Wrong With This Picture," question.

The UNM bookstore had a table set up outside the Kiva, selling his book and they lightened my wallet by $30. Though he didn't mention any of his books, and he wasn't available for a signing, it was just like a book event.

Excluding the radio and television media makes no sense. However, I played nice, I ask my question here. I’m sure that Scalia won’t be reading me and I won’t be forwarding this for his attention. I won’t cross swords with him; he’d slice and dice me like a veg-a-matic, but it won’t change the question, as to why he doesn’t deserve the coverage. It’s only his words and he controls them as he utters them.

At the tea party, participants got together to express their displeasure at what they see as: out of control "wasteful spending," in paying taxes they believe are misdirected, and are going to cost several generations to pay back.

I wonder what their “outrage” would have been if the results of the last election were different and if their preference had to face the same economic crisis, using similar acts as congress has used. I guess free speech doesn’t have to make much sense.

The City’s Measure Finance Committee requirements for registration and reporting have been in place for years. Fifteen years ago, after the October 3, 1995, elections, where the quarter cent Public Safety and Community Policing Tax was successfully defeated, with the aid of the Albuquerque Police Officers Association, Mayor Martin Chávez interjected himself into the APOA Presidential race.

Four-term President, Officer Billy Pounders was defeated with the backing of Chávez, left, by then Sergeant Marie "SiSi" Saenz-Miller, above right. She is now retired Captain Marie "Sisi" Miranda. The City Clerks fielded a complaint that the APOA had not registered as a "Measure Finance Committee." Miranda was willing to plead guilty before the City’s Board of Ethics and Campaign Practices and was prepared to pay a $100 fine.

Pounders and I got wind of the allegation that was made for actions occurring under his term, not Miranda’s. We attended the Board’s scheduled meeting and were initially denied entrance, but were escorted to a small over crowded conference room. When the case was called, we insisted we on being heard as the actual accused party. I spoke, it was the earlier APOA administration’s position that the "Measure Finance Committee" registration and reporting requirements, where funds were expended by the organization, when not in coordination with a candidate, were none of the City's business under the First Amendment. Our argument carried the day, no fine was assessed, but in part, because Miranda had since registered the APOA, even though there was no current measure requiring notice.

It wasn’t the first time the APOA had taken such a position, or successfully argued against attempts to enforce the "Measure Finance Committee" registration and reporting requirements. Then APOA President Pounders, at right table with former Gov. David Cargo answered City Ethics Board questions about independent support of Cargo during the Mayor's election. It seems to me that only those who accept the premise in the Charter as valid and not in conflict with the first Amendment would agree to comply.

The suggested changes to the Charter’s Measure Finance Committees clause violates the concepts of the First Amendment. There is a second City document, the Lobbyist and Lobbyist Organization Registration and Disclosure Ordinance, which might have an affect. It probably does not apply here because the representatives were giving oral testimony to a City Board. However, in other circumstances, such representatives may be required to be registered. Speaking to Councillors or City staff away from the direct oral or written testimony probably requires the strict compliance with the ordinance.

I openly defied Council and challenged them to pursue me for refusing to register as a further violation of the First Amendment. I got the proverbial pat on the head and the aren’t you just a silly boy comment from a then City Councilor who recognized the violation, but loved the law, because it was a power to be lorded over those wanting to deal with the City.

I agree with the groups objecting that the City’s measure finance committee requirements are designed to identify people and has an chilling effect on free speech.

It was then City Councillor Eric Griego who helped push the Lobbyist Registration and Disclosure Ordinance introduced by Councillor Miguel Gómez. "I don't think anyone can question my commitment to the First Amendment." Council Vice-President Griego stated, "This is not a free speech issue." I called it balderdash at the time of its passage; I wonder if he joins the nonprofit spokespersons that oppose it and would now also call it balderdash.

However, that is not how Lee or his colleague’s address the existing language. Before joining Lee, Brix was the executive director of Common Cause New Mexico and wrote a paper, “Albuquerque Clean Elections Campaign Final Summary Report,” in which he explains the formation of a registered measure financed committee to push the issue.

There is a perceived hypocritical aspect, as the groups applaud the reduction of campaign contributions, they still do their “education and advocacy” with unlimited and unidentified funding.

What the groups contend is educational is often couched as pointing out voting records of incumbents that “expose” them as opponents to the groups position on their issue or agenda. Such issue advocacy also attacks politicians with information that the politician accepts donations from individuals and organizations counter to their causes.

One group, New Mexico Voices for Children, published "New Mexico Fiscal Policy Project: Citizen’s Guide to Legislative Advocacy in New Mexico" in 2008, that has a review of lobbying rules. NMVC's Executive Director is State Senator and former City Councillor Eric Griego, right, who was one of Lee's Soltari's first and repeat clients.

It is not about the politics of the organizations, it’s about their funding, more specifically the tax-exempt status of the 501 (c) 3s. The concern is that these groups and others have worked hard and successfully to create publicly finances election campaigns and during the last legislative session they have successfully passed campaign finance limits that will curtail the amount of money allowed, specifically by parties to $5,000 per candidate.

The question to be answered, by someone other than the groups is; are their activities legal educational and advocacy work permissible under the IRS code?

The answer, at the groups level, can be found, not only on the IRS website but also on the Federal Election Commission’s website

The magic language seems to be:

On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

The size of donations to 501 (c) 3s are not limited and donors are not required to be identified.

If 501 (c) 3s can find ways to assist candidates they favor, or who might support their causes to get elected without violating the law, then traditional campaign contribution limits become meaningless.

However, if the activities of the 501 (c) 3s is definitively found to be legal, then the parties, both the Democrats and Republicans are likely to seriously form their own 501 (c) 3s to skirt around the new campaign finance limits.

Last week, Scalia wrote an opinion on punishing broadcasters for airing a couple of words deemed offensive.

Federal Communications Commission, Et Al., Petitioners v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., Et Al.

Even when used as an expletive, the F-Word’s power to insult and offend derives from its sexual meaning. And the decision to look at the patent offensiveness of even isolated uses of sexual and excretory words fits with Pacifica’s context-based approach. Because the FCC’s prior safe-harbor-for-single-words approach would likely lead to more widespread use, and in light of technological advances reducing the costs of bleeping offending words, it was rational for the agency to step away from its old regime. The FCC’s decision not to impose sanctions precludes any argument that it is arbitrarily punishing parties without notice of their actions’ potential consequences.

Contrary to what he argued in his lecture, just a couple of weeks before, Scalia abandoned his originalist and texualist argument and adopted the living document argument; that it means what he thinks it should mean today. He adopts our own Mayor’s favorite reason to suppress things he dislikes, in a plaintive voice by asking, “what do we tell the children?” Maybe the answer Justice Scalia and Mr. Mayor, is to say that those are impolite, inappropriate and rude words. They won’t be tolerated in your presence and turn off the television set; then go read the kid a book.

If Scalia has no problem limiting words, though he claims that free speech was not an issue in this opinion, it’s clear that the government has the power, beyond radio communications, to have economic control of how words are used in public. The arguments made by the non-profits, and in particular the tax-exempts that local and state government is beyond the reach because of federal preemption clash as “Super Free Speech,” I’d love to know I didn’t have to pay taxes to write what I do under the guise of doing social good through education and advocacy, but I don’t.

Final Thought

Maybe Mayor Chávez is partially right, at least to the extent that it is about the children. However, it’s not what do we tell them; it’s what do they tell us?

For all the "Free Speech" noise; this little girl’s sign got it right…

Just Like a Star

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

My Dad, left, Lt. Col. Walter S. Bralley (Ret.) was an administrator type in the Air Force and during one of his philosophical moments, he allowed that within the service there was a reality, which often played itself out; if you wanted your name to get known, there was nothing better than a big mistake.

He wasn’t talking about the evil kind of mistake, the mistake of the head. No, he was talking about a mistake of trying to do something good, but impermissible, or a mistake of the heart.

Rookie mistakes abound in all fields of endeavor, especially when talent has not had time to meet experience. It happens all the time and one of the best was on display at the State legislature.

It has become popular political sport to blame someone for the perceived problems in legislative service. One of those groups targeted are lobbyists.

Paid lobbyists, as they are euphemistically referred to, are made out to be the worst things to ever walk the face of the earth, spreading corruption and worse, influence in their path.

More than 25 years ago I registered as a lobbyist. Legally, I didn’t have to. I wasn't being paid by any group to speak for them. I was just watching a piece of legislation, the Police Officers Bill of Right.

I had been the Albuquerque Police Officers Association President, left in a campaign photo, and had I put in motion the introduction of the bill.

An amendment, offered by the Chiefs of Police association, eviscerated that bill by eliminating the due process clause. I switched my position and opposed the legislation going forward.

My fellow union and Fraternal Order of Police lobbyists wanted to push the bill forward, saying we’ll get it in place then come back and fix it. They became angry when I testified against the bill.

I was yelled at in a public hallway for trying to “hurt police officers.” I was told that I couldn’t stop the bill; that it was greased all the way through. I don’t respond well to being yelled at. “Hide and watch,” I stated.

Long story short, I explained myself to two Representatives: Cisco McSorley, D, Bernalillo County, and Pauline Eisenstadt, D, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties. The bill was killed with a do not pass recommendation in the House Judiciary committee made by McSorley, who was vice chair. Eisenstadt seconded the motion.

At the end of the 1987 State Legislature, the three Albuquerque Police Officers lobbying for the Fraternal Order of Police, sent McSorley a black rose with a note, with a drawing of a man with a knife in his back; it read: “Thanks for your support.” It wasn't one of the yellow roses from the west side of the Roundhouse.

McSorley did not know who sent the items and he took them as a threat. When the police department announced they were investigating, the FOP/APD lobbyists admitted they sent the flower, through a State Senator. The "Black Rose" incident came into full bloom. A very public investigation ensued. The usually secret activities of the Internal Affairs unit were being played out on the front pages of the daily papers and on television news.

This is McSorley, above as he appears now in the Senate, where he has served since 1997.

McSorley was then a Representative, and I spoke with him about how the police leadership was manipulating the investigation, in part, by not getting him to sign a complaint. McSorley said, at the time, he was willing to sign, but was told by a deputy chief it was unnecessary. Police administrators were building a procedural loophole for a future grievance process. I had seen it before and understood the tactic.

On May 5, 1987, Albuquerque Tribune Staff Reporter Lynn Bartels wrote a story, entitled "'Black rose' investigation expands police also probe ex-head of union", "Albuquerque police were investigating whether the former president of the police union 'interfered' with a 'black rose' probe underway for the past three weeks." I had, "declined to make a statement except to say that if officers want to talk to people, 'it's an absolute' First Amendment right," Bartels wrote.

I was the subject of a new internal affairs investigation. The allegations were many, the proposed discipline harsh, and the defense simple, the First Amendment.

I had not made any threats to legislators, or anyone else, nor had I sent any flowers. I had been on the other side; trying to make the process work.

I had done everything they accused me of, but not for the reasons they said I did them. However, I held a “Get Out of Jail Free card; I had registered as a lobbyist, no one else involved in the case had. I had spoken to McSorley, protected by the right of free speech, association through assembly, and to petition government. My activities did not impact how I did my job. Everything I did that they accused me of was done off duty. I walked. However, the ramifications lasted for years; all the way to my retirement.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

This is my 1993 registered lobbyist identification card, when the Police Officers Bill of Rights came before the legislature again. The bill was straightforward and worked its way through the legislative process without any attempts to alter it before its introduction or to amend it. It passed both house and was signed by the Governor. For me, it had been a 16-year effort to set in place, by law, some basic protections for officers during administrative investigations and grievance procedures. There were three legislative efforts before achieving success.

Now comes rookie State Representative Eleanor Chavez, D, Bernalillo County, with HB 535 Lobbyist Identification Badges.

The relevant language being:

Lobbyist Identification Badges Required.

A. Upon the filing of a registration statement pursuant to Section 2-11-3 NMSA 1978, the secretary of state shall issue to each registered lobbyist an identification badge that shall contain in plain, bold and legible letters the word "Lobbyist" and the name of the lobbyist. The badge shall also contain in plain legible letters the year and the names of all of the lobbyist's employers. The secretary of state shall change the color of the badge each year.

B. Every registered lobbyist shall conspicuously display the identification badge on the lobbyist's clothing while in the state capitol during a regular session, special session, extraordinary session or interim committee meeting of the legislature.

C. The secretary of state shall collect a fee of ten dollars ($10.00) for the issuance of a duplicate lobbyist identification badge.

Legislators and the public attending the capitol will all know who the lobbyists are.

Chavez told Democracy for New Mexico. The bill was publicized as:

“We in the Legislature need to know at a glance who the lobbyists are and who they represent,” said Rep. Chavez. “This measure will bring critically needed transparency to the legislative process and will increase the public’s confidence in our government."

The recommendation to have lobbyist's identified by a badge came from the Governor's Ethics Task Force, according to New Mexico Common Cause’s Executive Director Steven Robert Allen. There were two tasks forces, in 2006 and it was reconstituted in 2007 after little was accomplished from the first series of recommendations.

The bill died awaiting its first hearing in the House Business and Industry Committee.

Chavez, left, is one of the three “Progressive” Democrats elected from Bernalillo County by knocking of the old guard, Senators James Taylor and Shannon Robinson, and Representative Dan Silva during last year’s primary. None faced a general election opponent.

Progressive is the new moniker for “Liberal.” It seems that the classification of the label “Liberal” was perceived as becoming a detriment.

Newly elected Sens. Eric Griego, replaced Taylor and Timothy Keller defeated Robinson, also introduced legislation directed at lobbyists.

Griego introduced SB 163 Prohibit Former Legislators as Lobbyists.

Sen. Mark Boitano, R, Bernalillo County, introduced an identically named bill restricting former legislators from being employed as lobbyists for one year after serving.

Griego joined Boitano in presenting their bills before the Senate Rules Committee. However, Chairwoman Linda Lopez, D, Bernalillo County, followed a long-standing policy of not reporting out multiple bills on the same topic.

Griego and Boitano met and produced a substitute bill, which was carried as Griego's SB 163. Senate Rules approved the bill on a 4-1 vote; with Chairwoman Lopez, Peter Wirth, D, Santa Fe County, Dede Feldman, D, Bernalillo County, Kent Cravens, R, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, voting for, and Stuart Ingle, R, Chaves, Curry, De Baca, and Roosevelt, opposing. Sens. Dianna Duran, D, Dona Ana and Otero Counties, Senate President Pro Tem Timothy Jennings, D, Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln and Otero Counties, and Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, D, Valencia County, were excused.

The bill went to the House Judiciary Committee, where it passed on a 7-3 vote; with one excused.

The bill failed on the Senate floor on a 14-22 vote; with three excused.

However, a question arose during the floor debate asking, how many former legislators were now lobbyists. Some other legislator, instead of simply asking the Secretary of State’s Public Information Officer James Flores, right, to compare the SoS’s index of registered lobbyists with the Legislative Council Services’ who has someone with a institutional historic memory, to come up with a number, challenged the press or more specifically, someone in the blogosphere to find that out.

According to the current Secretary of State’s index of registered lobbyists, this is what I determined. I might have missed some because I don’t know all the former legislators.

The breadth of their client's list is telling of their perceived ability to carry the message:

Former State Sen. Mickey Dee Barnett
Labor Ready Southwest Inc/True Blue Inc
New Mexico Independent Finance Association
Reynolds American Inc
Santa Ana Pueblo

Former State Sen. Tom Benavides
New Mexicans for Moral and Constitutional Government

Former State Sen. and former Lt. Gov. Walter Bradley, R, left, speaking with Sen. Jennings after a senate Rules Committee meeting.
Dairy Farmers of America Inc.

Former State Rep. and State Sen. Fabián Chávez, Jr.
New Mexico Public Employees Retirement Assoc (PERA)

Former State Sen. Tito Chávez
Association Of American Publishers, Inc.
Digital Arts & Technology Academy
New Mexico Association Of Counties

Former State Sen. Christine Donisthorpe
City of Aztec, New Mexico
City of Bloomfield, NM
San Juan County

Former State Sen, Roman Maes III
Ca. Inc.
National Center for Genome Resources
New Mexico Public Relations Orion Technologies Qwest Corporation
Real Estate Central

Former State Rep. Richard “Dick” Minzner
Ajinomoto Food Ingredients LLC
American Council of Life Insurers
FPL Energy, LLC
Mesilla Valley Hospital
Neutron Energy Inc.
New Mexico Boys and Girls Ranches
Psychiatrics Solutions Inc
Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association, Inc.
University of New Mexico
Westland Devco LP

Former Speaker of the House Rep. David L. Norvell, and husband of current Rep. Gail Chasey. Norvell, right, is seen here with then Lt. Gov. Eli Frances, at the opening of the 1970 Legislature where Gov. David Cargo gave his State of the State address.
New Mexico Gaming Control Board

Former State Rep. M. Michael Olguin
Cottonwood Financial Administration Service, LLC.
Cottonwood Financial, Ltd.
Laguna Development Corp.
Olguin and Riordan
Pueblo of Laguna

Former State Rep. Hoyt Pattison
Dairy Producers of New Mexico

Former State Sen. Tom Rutherford
Access Concierge
Albuquerque Economic Development
Anderson-Abruzzo Balloon Museum Foundation,
Angel Fire Resort Operation, LLC
Associated Builders And Contractors Inc NM Chapter
Chevron Mining Inc.
City of Clayton
Cumbres & Toltec Scenic Railroad
Dollar Rent A Car/Santa Fe Fleet Services
DPMS, Inc.,
Express Ranches/UU Bar
Film Industry Promotion Assoc.
Honeywell International, Inc.,
Moreno Valley Education Foundation
National Atomic Museum Foundation
National Council To Prevent Delinquency
New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides,
New Mexico Symphony Orchestra,
NM Legislative Sportsmen Foundation,
Northern New Mexico Independent Electrical Contractors,
Union County,
United Blood Services of New Mexico,
Unser Racing Museum.
Value Options Inc.

Former Speaker of the House Rep. Raymond G. Sanchez, right front, with his brother, current Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, left rear. Ray Sanchez is also the newly appointed President of the University of New Mexico Regents replacing Jamie Koch at the insistence of Gov. Bill Richardson.
3M Traffic Safety Systems Division
Albuquerque Area Fire Fighters Local
Allsups Convenience Stores Inc.
Consumer Installment Loan Association
Forest City Covington NM LLC
New Mexico Horse Breeders Association
NM Hearing Health Care Providers Association
Save the Children Federation Inc.
Stewart Title Guaranty Co.
Winrock Partners, LLC

Former State Rep. Daniel P. Silva
Jalapeno Corporation

Former State Rep. Garth Simms
New Mexico Council of Outfitters and Guides

Former State Sen. H. Diane Snyder
American Consulting Engineers Council Of New Mexico
H.D. Snyder And Associates

Former State Rep. John Lee Thompson
American Academy of Aphthalmology
American Consulting Engineers Council of New Mexico
Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Company
Butch Maki and Associates
L & F Distributors, LLC.
Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District
New Mexico Funeral Service Association
New Mexico Horsemen's Association
Premier Distributing Company

Former State Rep. Joseph M. Thompson
Anderson-Abruzzo Balloon Museum Foundation
Associated Builders and Contractors Inc NM Chapter
Circle P of New Mexico, LLC
City of Clayton
Eastern New Mexico Rural Water Authority
Equality New Mexico
Georgia O'Keefe Museum
National Atomic Museum Foundation
New Mexico Optometric Association
New Mexico Shooting Sports Association
New Mexico Symphony Orchestra
Northern New Mexico Independent Electrical Contractors
Paseo Gateway, LLC
Saddleback Ranch Estates, LLC
Santa Fe Properties, Inc.
Thompson Consulting
Union County
University of New Mexico
Value Options of New Mexico
Westland Devco LP

Former State Sen. R. E. Thompson
Albuquerque Academy
General Motors Corporation
McLane Company Inc

This is former State Rep. Johnnie Archebeque, D, Sandoval County. He is 86 years old and holds the Legislative directories from when he served in 1945-46 and 1957-58. He is currently lobbying for the American Association of Retired Persons and the National Education Association New Mexico.

Had the law already been in effect, only Silva and Snyder would have been banned for the one-year, because they only left office Dec. 31, 2008.

Sen. Eric Griego, left, with Common Cause’s Executive Director Steven Robert Allen, also sponsored SB 165 Public Campaign Act, presenting it before the Senate Rules committee. The bill would provide for voluntary public campaign financing of elections for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, Commissioner of Public Lands, State Treasurer, State Auditor, Secretary of State and State Legislators. It was stalled on a 3-3 vote, tabled and never moved. There was a high fiscal impact associated with the bill and in the economic crush; even Griego understood the fate of the bill.

Griego did not responded to an e-mail request to his legislative address for comment on this story.

SB 693, Relating to elections; prohibiting certain contributions and solicitations of contributions by business entities and lobbyists and the principals of state contractors; prohibiting certain solicitations of contributions from business entities and lobbyists and the principals of state contractors.

SJR 14 a joint resolution proposing an amendment to Article 4 of the Constitution of New Mexico to allow employees of educational institutions to serve as legislators.

These bills were left stuck in the Senate Rules Committee at the end of the session.

Sens. Keller, left, Sue Wilson Beffort, R, Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe and Torrance Counties, right, and Feldman, center, presented bills that would prohibit contractors from making political contributions for up to two years prior to accepting any State work.

Keller introduced, SB 258, it was merged along with SB 296 sponsored by Sen. Feldman and into substitute bill SB 263 sponsored by Sen. Wilson Beffort, which passed the Senate 26-11 and received a do pass recommendation from the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee A similarly named bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Tom Taylor, R, San Juan, as HB 244 Prohibit Contractor Contribution Solicitation which was left stalled in the House Voters and Elections committee.

Sen. Wirth, left, introduced SB 128, requiring biannual campaign reports; it passed both houses and the Governor signed it.

Most, so called ethics bills, littered the path to successful legislation for a variety of reasons.

Many activists are quick to point fingers at leaders or members for blocking or stalling bills they see as good and necessary. It might be true that some of the bills are worthy of more consideration than what they were relegated, but the political process is one of bringing offered legislation together with receptive legislators.

One activist’s perfect solution may be one legislator’s worst nightmare, not because there is something evil about how the legislator views the world, but because the activist’s solution doesn’t solve the problem; it simply compounds it.

Four Senators: Pete Campos, D, Guadalupe, Mora, San Miguel, Santa Fe, and Torrance Counties, Lopez, Feldman, and John C. Ryan, R, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties, individually carried State Ethics Commission Acts. Under the committee's rule to form a substitute, the four Senators retired to work on a consensus, but never returned.

History

The First Amendment of the Constitution reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and petition the Government for redress of grievances.

The Bill of Rights are also binding on the State by the 14th Amendment and by the State’s own Constitution.

Section 1. Supreme law of the land.

The state of New Mexico is an inseparable part of the federal union, and the constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land.

Sec. 17. Freedom of speech and press; libel.

Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted.

Congress, nor the State shall make no law. No law!

Rep. Chavez’ proposal would make law that steps on at least three of the Constitutional rights by pre-conditioning citizens to wear badges identifying them as “Lobbyists.” The rights are: speech, assembly, and the right to petition the Government for redress of grievances.

Analysis

Badges denote office.

Rep. Chavez has it totally upside down. Officers of government wear badges; police and fire officers wear chest plates, like the newly issued Albuquerque Police department badges. Rank has more color, gold in this case for ranking officers.

In South America Mayors wear sashes of their community's colors; presidents were the colors of their flag. In Europe Mayors wear chains, sometimes with the keys of the city. Kings and Queens wear crowns.

Sen. Keller wears a lapel pin of the Albuquerque City Council. It was a gift from City Councillor Rey Garduno, whose district covers half of Keller's Senate District. Garduno also served on Keller's campaign committee. The pin is an example of a badge of office.

Keller said in an interview, that when he was carrying a specific piece of legislation for a group or organization, like unions or the university, he would wear their pins.

Keller said he met a number of lobbyists during the session wearing very tastefully designed silver and turquoise lapel pins that said, "New Mexico lobbyist" in an effort to be recognized.

During Roman times, Senators wore the toga praetexta with its broad purple stripe, maroon shoes and if they were of the rank of curule magistracy, denoted by a gold buckle; they had the right to speak in the senate and to vote.

As an aside, the Roman Senate had its own ethical rule:

Senators were forbidden to engage in mercantile activities outside of the ownership of land and natural resources.

What are we doing? Is this the first “innocent” step to make a lawful act visible? Are we requiring people to wear a sign like lepers were made to do, warning of their highly contagious disease?

Such minor acts grew into the horror of Nazi Germany. At first it didn’t sound so bad, but it was. Later, the required wearing of symbols denoting: Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, and others, allowed for the rapid identification of marked people who were rounded up, imprisoned in concentration camps, with many exterminated.

Such derision is not without history in the United States. Japanese-Americans were rounded up at the beginning of World War II. Recall my posting on Manzanar. Recently the Patriot act permitted holding people without the right of habeas corpus.

If Rep. Chavez wants to know with whom she's talking, she should just ask. Lobbyists will not deny their information or identity because that defeats the entire purpose in contacting legislators.

Shakespeare had a character in Henry VI proclaim, “The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers.”

In Henry VI’s time, lawyers did the lobbying, the advising as regents for the infant King and then all through his unstable reign.

The Progressives are not trying to figuratively kill the lobbyists that they see as wielding unacceptable influence and power. They appear to be just trying to blunt what the Progressives see as those lobbyists from wielding what they see as unacceptable influence and power.

As the process commenced, bills came up for debate before the Senate Rules committee that included limiting the influence of what are called nonprofits from using tax-exempt funds for political purposes.

Chavez wasn’t totally wrong, she sponsored HB 534, allowing for electronic request of public records; requiring a public records custodian to make public records available via electronic media upon request. Previously, some government agencies required in person inspection of such records, that now maybe provided by electronic means.

This bill was also supported by Attorney General Gary King, above, who spoke about the issue of technology impacting the Public Records Inspections Act, during a legal continuing education credit seminar Aug. 8, 2008, which I reported for Peter St. Cyr.

My Take

So what is it that makes lobbyists a bad word? Some wish to associate lobbyists with corruptive activities. There is an image of shady characters with bags full of money being handed to politicians under the table.

Mention, Congress shall make no law, in the context of lobby registration or limitations, and you may get the response I have gotten more than once; it's about the money. It came fast, emphatically, and with a sneer. In a perfect world money would be unnecessary in the political sphere; but candidates must get their name known and that costs. In that perfect world, candidates would discuss issues and explain their agendas without having to attack their opponent. As costly as that has become, it seems cheaper to spend huge amounts negatively.

People clog the halls of the legislature during the committee meetings. Some are registered lobbyists, most are interested in some issue on the agenda. Few just go to the legislature to watch. Most lobbying happens much earlier, before the session, as legislation is drafted. The money that many object to is what is donated to campaigns. The amounts that professional lobbyists earn is more likely a reflection of their persuasive skills, than them carrying money.

Lobbying does not require a person to be paid to push an agenda politically. Anyone who talks to or joins a group to inform their representatives of their particular issues is a lobbyist exercising their First Amendment rights. Many people are unable to recite the later sections of the amendment: the right to peaceably assemble and the right to petition government for a redress of grievance.

More importantly, Chavez doesn’t recognize her obligation as a governmental representative to honor the First Amendment’s prohibition, “Congress shall make no law…” when she tries to precondition citizens who petition her and her colleagues with their issues making them wear identifiers.

New Mexico State University Department Agriculture and Home Economics students Dennis Garcia, Rachael Lindsay Thomen and DeeAnn Shafer, representing a group of "Ambassadors" wear their uniforms with their name tags as they visited the Roundhouse. They stopped at the kiosk to locate their legislator's office numbers.

Rep. Chavez should consider every person with whom she comes into contact, as a constituent, whether they reside in her district or not.

Every person has a right to ask her, as an elected representative, to consider their particular issue, whether they are paid to promote an agenda or not.

Everybody is entitled to be equally heard. If she wants to be fair and truly believes in governmental transparency, she will conduct all her contacts in open, not accept: food, drink, money, gift, or favor from those who seek her assistance.

No doubt, governmental consideration is an exercise in priorities, however, those priorities should not be purchased by the well connected or loudest or largest groups.

I know that would make her a rare breed of politician, but it would also make her a true public servant.

How legislators handle donations and whether they are unduly influenced by contributions in granting legislative favor is the greatest problem to decipher.

It is illegal to either buy or sell a vote. There is nothing illegal about supporting a candidate who will vote from the same mindset as their constituents.

How candidates get financed, be it through their own campaigns, or with the support of their Party, or through independent third parties, is the problem to be solved.

A big question is, what role are some of the tax-exempt organizations playing in pushing their political agendas under the protection of the IRS status.

It would seem that anyone who can count, understands the difference between the amount of money not made available by paying taxes and the amount tax-exemption provides. That could be a substantial amount.

Further, if donations to a tax-exempt organization are both unlimited and anonymous, then if one can find a way to push their political agenda, it would be a sweet deal.

That seems to be the accusation against a small number of groups that are associated with the "Progressives." As they call for ethics reform they work feverishly to find ways to avoid playing on the same level field they call for.

There is no question that truly independent individuals or groups who have no association with any campaign may spend as much as they like on any issue. However, there are two points here: tax-exempts may not be political and when their overarching political goal is more important than the individual candidate's election, then the support becomes subservient.

Some activities are clearly legal, while some coordinated efforts, as seen by the crossover of leaders and staff members sitting on multiple boards and or working at multiple levels and moving between the tax-exempt protected arena and the more campaign finance regulated political world raises issues of fraudulent conduct.

There are thousands of tax-exempt organizations that go about doing their good works without ever coming close to being political. The noticeable rise in activity is by a small number of tax-exempt groups who have taken an aggressive posture and are testing the limits as never before.

The only penalty, if that's the right word, for the tax-exempts, is not a limit on their free speech; nothing can take that away from them. The only requirement is that their contributors will have to pay their taxes, just like the rest of us. Organizations will have to declare contributions as political donations on campaign finance documents so the public may inspect where the money came from.

Nothing suggested here prohibits, limits or impedes the philanthropically funded works of the tax-exempt organizations. They are free to espouse the social agenda, just not cross into political campaigns. There are legal ways of doing that, but you don't get the same "bang for your buck."

The lobbying efforts happen at a number of levels.

This is Attorney General Gary King’s Legislative Team Leader Stuart Bluestone, right, reviewing a piece of legislation with Terri Cole, who represents the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce. She is considered by some to hold a great deal of influence because of the large number of businesses for whom Cole speaks. Bluestone, addressed the Senate Rules Committee on many issues including the proposed ethics commission legislation. He serves in a dual capacity: lobbying, by stating the AG's office supports particular bills, and by advising on legal matters before the committee.

Secretary of State Ethics Officer Tessa Jo Mascarenas, spoke to the Senate Rules Committee about the burden that new ethics reform legislation places on her office, especially when the necessary funding is not included in the bill. Much of the state's ethics requirements are handled through the SoS's office by reports filed by: candidates, campaigns, third party groups, and lobbyists .

Other government workers also lobby for their respective departments or to add information to committee debates. They include: Stephanie Kiger, who as of April 6, is now Deputy Counsel to the Governor. She was an associate counsel at the time of this picture, before her new appointment, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology President Dr. Daniel López, center, Attorney David Barton, of the Public Regulations Commissions' general counsel's office, and Bureau of Elections Administrator Kelli Fulgenzi, right, who spoke about the effects of campaign reporting requirements on the Secretary of State’s office.

Municipal, local governmental officials and extra governmental entities act as lobbyists pushing for approval of capital expenditures, and other issues, including: Clovis Mayor Pro Tem Michael Miller, left, Sandoval County Emergency Services Coordinator Mike Scales, left of center photo, and New Mexico's Council of University Presidents Communications Specialist Theresa Graham, right.

There are the powerhouse lobbyists like: Cole, above, William Fulginiti, left, who represents the New Mexico Municipal League, an association of cities, towns and villages. During the session, I didn't even see one of the real power players. Scott Scanland, right, who lobbies for a number of diverse interests. Here he is shown on Joe Monahan's election coverage radio shows on KANW FM 89.1, as the chief statistician and the "neutral" tea leaf reader.

These are supporters, of Senate Joint Memorial 32, Navajo Code Talker Museum and Veterans' Center, sponsored by Sen. John Pinto, D, McKinley and San Juan Counties, that went on to be passed unanimously in both houses and signed by the Governor. Marine Codetalker Keith Little, left, with fellow supporters.

People associated with political parties monitor the progress of legislation, sometimes speaking for or against a bill or documenting. Here during the Senate Rules committee are: former Democratic candidate for State Representative District 59, Dr. Ellen Wedum, former Democratic U.S. Senate primary candidate Leland Lehrman, a registered lobbyist for Mother Media, Democracy for New Mexico's Terry Riley, and Senate GOP Majority Communications Director Diane Kinderwater.

Then there are lobbyists who represent wide-ranging nonprofit, nonpartisan membership organizations, like: AARP’s Nancy Ann Dayton, and President of the League of Women Voters of NM Kathy Campbell.

Groups of people, including students, gather at the Capitol, many for what are known as "a day at the Capitol," to express their support for legislation they wish passed or to be in opposition.

Almost daily, some group, like this one honoring the birth of Martin Luther King Jr., will hold a rally in the rotunda where speeches, entertainment and demonstrations occur.

Here, children from Albuquerque’s fourth-graders from Carlos Rey Elementary School joined a group called Wild Friends, before, Senate Rules Committee on House Joint Memorial 4, Wildlife Corridor Info Sharing, sponsored by Rep. Mimi Stewart, D, Bernalillo County.

Wild Friends, is a part of the Center for Wildlife Law, at the University of New Mexico’s School of Law Institute of Public Law and enlists students to move their agenda forward. Who could turn down kids or fury animals?

Game and Fish Law Enforcement Chief Patrick H. Block, spoke in support of the memorial, which passed the house 62-0 and the Senate 37-0; and has been signed by the governor.

Many so-called ethics reform bills are perceived to be written backwards; they are written to prohibit individuals from spending their own money as a form of speech.

The more correct way is to write the legislation prohibiting candidates or office holders from accepting money at a specified amount limit. Some will try to argue that it a difference without a distinction, but it's not.

The Supreme Court case of Buckley v. Valeo equated money with free speech. The difference is an individual or group may spend all the money they want, as long as they do not coordinate it with the candidate, campaign or Party.

Read a PBS New Hour analysis on the argument that there should be no court authorized difference between contributions and expenditures arguing that it is all political speech and there are other ways of prohibiting corruption than through monetary limits.

In reality few individuals will spend their political money independently. More often citizens donate directly to a candidate, campaign or party allowing them to decide how best to coordinate the spending of such money.

New Mexico Assistant Attorney General Phil Baca, left, who drafted many of the ethics bills, said that the bills, and specifically SB 116, contribution limits, which became law, was written both ways. Here is an example from the bill of existing language:

A person shall not knowingly accept or solicit a contribution, directly or indirectly, including a contribution earmarked or otherwise directed or coordinated through a third party, that violates the contribution limits provided for in this section.

Lobbying is a Constitutionally protected right and it is a bit disheartening to see one group of legislator's backers accuse some lobbyists of spending huge amounts of corporate funds to push favorable passage of legislation. At the same time, organizations that worked diligently to assist the new "Progressive" law makers get elected are likewise accused of hiding unlimited amounts of money behind their federal tax-exempt status, and they claim they had no political role in the defeats.

The "Progressive" label has a long history. Apparently, it has several meanings and though related there are distinctions. Currently, Republicans wish to associate it with liberalism.

It might be easy to make a list of all the things that the local "Progressive" movement has been involved with over the past few years and say that’s how bad they are, but that would be so inaccurate.

When one looks at what the "Progressives" have done, I personally have found myself siding with several of their causes. One particular effort was forestalling the forcing of Paseo del Norte extension over the escarpment through the Petroglyph National Monument.

I produced the above montage, of controversial local issues, for a University Art class. Click on the picture to view details.

Eli Il Yong Lee, was the President and CEO of Soltari Inc., he is now the Executive Director of the Center for Civic Policy Center for Civic Action. He is the de-facto head of the local Progressives and currently sits on the City of Albuquerque's charter review task force.

The only encounter I have ever had with Lee, left, was during the ethics board hearings for Mayor Martin Chávez. Lee was present for the several days of the proceedings. He was always in the same location near the back of the room with his laptop computer open and taking notes.

During one of the recesses, I approached, introduced myself and inquired who he was and what his particular interest in the case was. Lee denied he had any interest beyond that of an ordinary citizen.

I didn’t forget who he was, but it took several years before he went public, approaching City Council on some issue and that is when I learned his name and associations.

Lee can be read at Clearly New Mexico.

In 2003, Lee led the Anti-Road Tax that had the Paseo del Norte extension tucked into it. The tax was defeated. A couple of years later, with the extension in the open the bonding was approved.

Albuquerque "Progressives" began appearing on the scene in 2001 with the help of Lee’s Soltari Inc. Executive Director New Mexico Voices for Children Eric Griego, was elected to the Albuquerque City Council in 2002. Griego’s profession shaped his political history. He ran for Mayor in 2005 and was defeated by Martin Chávez.

In 2003, Martin Heinrich and Debbie O'Malley were elected to the City Council. Other Soltari clients have included: Gov. Bill Richardson, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, City Councilors Michael Cadigan and State Sen. Linda Lopez.

In 2005, Soltari candidates and issues did not fare so well. Griego was defeated in a run against Mayor Martin Chávez and voters rejected the minimum wage initiative.

“Albuquerque Clean Elections Campaign Final Summary Report,” by Executive Director, Common Cause New Mexico Matt Brix, was released October 4, 2005. The document outlines the efforts and participants in passing the Open and Ethical Elections code, sponsored by then City Councillor Eric Griego.

Smoking Gun?

State Republican Chairman Harvey Yates Jr. pointed out to the Conspiracy Brews meeting an article, “Rocky Ride The Republicans’ fall from power in Colorado — and how the Democrats hope to replicate it” which was published in the National Review from a soon to be published book: The Blueprint: How Democrats Won the West (and Why Republicans Should Care), by Rob Witwer and Adam Schrager.

Yates read from the article:

In hindsight, what Colorado Democrats did was as simple as it was effective. First, they built a robust network of nonprofit entities to replace the Colorado Democratic party, which had been rendered obsolete by campaign-finance reform. Second, they raised historic amounts of money from large donors to fund these entities. Third, they developed a consistent, topical message. Fourth, and most important, they put aside their policy differences to focus on the common goal of winning elections. As former Democratic house majority leader Alice Madden later said, “It’s not rocket science.”

Yates, seen here with the newly elected Bernalillo County Republican Chairman Charlie Tipton, suggested the same thing was happening in New Mexico.

Yates didn’t need to rely solely on a conservative publication, he had also uncovered an internal document from the Progressives outlining plans to create political actions leading to circumventing campaign finance limits and prohibitions against political action by the tax-exempt organizations.

The document, published by the Proteus fund: Report on Six Emerging Collaborative State Projects -- Building long-term capacity in Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, North Carolina and Wisconsin, was prepared for the September 17 – 18, 2007 meeting of the State Strategies Fund held in New York City.

In the report some conflicting information is revealed about the status of Lee’s employment.

On September 30, 2007, Lee, as the President and CEO of Soltari Inc., made a $250 donation for the primary campaign of Democrat Martin Heinrich For Congress. It was one of three donations made, totaling $950 to Heinrich. Lee made other donations later as Executive Director of the Center for Civic Policy.

The importance of the dates are that they conflict with what the federally required report reads about Lee being either the President and CEO of Soltari Inc., or Executive Director of the Center for Civic Policy. Sometime in late 2007, or early 2008, Soltari ceased being a commercial political consulting group and moved its entire operation to the tax-exempt Center for Civic Policy and its sister organization, the Center for Civic Action. The report also notes:

…A sponsored project of the New Mexico Community Foundation, CCP is led by former political consultant Eli Lee and the former staff of his consulting firm, Soltari, Inc., who are now full time employees of the Center. The small final number of participating groups, notwithstanding, CCP underwent a year-long selection process that involved a series of meetings.

Lee, through the centers, has gathered the cooperation of a number of Internal Revenue certified organizations with 501 (c) (3) and 501 (c) (4) tax-exempt status. There are restrictions on 501 (c) (3) organizations, they specifically may not engage in the political process and the activities of a number of the partners: Common Cause, Conservation Voters New Mexico, League of Young Voters, Sacred Alliance for Grassroots Equality, known as, SAGE Council, and Southwest Organizing Project, have been called into question by the New Mexico Attorney General and Secretary of State.

The Internal Revenue’s tax-exempt certified organizations have some important benefits in the public realm. Tax-exempt organizations have no limit on the size of donations they may receive and the name of the donor does not have to be reported. Political activity is specifically outlawed by IRS rules.

The organizations admit to having sent fliers to targeted legislative areas in an effort to, as they assert, pass on educational information. The fliers looked like the kinds of political documents in vogue in New Mexico at this time; they use the rhetoric of attack ads, imagery that imparts disgust fro incumbents who are in disfavor with the ideology of the organization, and end with a call for action. An example was a flier put out to “inform’ voters that their incumbent had taken “large” donations from, what are described as “special interest groups” and voted for legislation favorable to the special interest and to the detriment of the community. The flier had a call to action. It listed the incumbents' phone number and implored the voter to call and tell their legislator not to take the special interest’s money and to remember that they work for the citizens.

The Attorney General advised the Secretary of State to order the groups to file campaign finance documents.

The tax-exempt organizations denied having done anything wrong and filed a preemptive lawsuit against Attorney General and Secretary of State.

The groups demand that the Attorney General explaine the law to them. That's not how it works in the United States. Legislatures pass laws, they are codified and available. The people are required to obey them, if people have questions, they go to an attorney for legal advice. If the state is not satisfied with the compliance then they may take administrative or criminal action.

In questioning the tax-exempts, their defenders engage in double speak saying that they have never mentioned the name of any political candidate, or spoken at times that the federal government has deemed to be campaign season.

However, neither of those things is true. Fliers were produced with incumbent candidates names on them allegedly as voter education pieces. If objectively analyzed by students of political rhetoric, campaign advertising, and persuasion, one can only conclude that the use of the medium mirrors that of traditional negative campaign attack medium and it would be virtually impossible to recognize or distinguish them as anything other than political hit pieces.

You decide.

The State Strategies Fund report contains language provided by Lee’s group that clearly sets out their intentions to influence the outcome of elections:

B. New Mexico’s evaluation of efforts to shape the electoral battlefield

…This is important since they are operating in a civic engagement arena with a goal of shaping the election battlefield and where other partisan efforts are looking for very hard edged outcomes in terms of winning elections.

The problem is not with what these groups are trying to do; clearly it is political action protected by the First Amendment. What is troubling and looks on its face to be illegal is the means of financing their efforts.

During the recently ended legislative session, any mention of attempts to have the tax-exempt 501 (c) (3) and 501 (c) (4) organizations held accountable was met with a lobbyist's wall of fire.

Former head of Common Cause and a member of the Governor's Ethics Task Force who is currently Policy Director for the Center for Civic Policy Matt Brix, above, lobbies for it and also the Center for Civic Action.

During the discussion of SB 247, Third-Party Registration Agents, introduced by Sen. Ryan, lobbyists for the tax exempt groups simultaneously rose up to denounce any attempt to hold them to any requirements that apply to other organizations that gather voter registration signatures.

The incident reveals the arrogance of these groups, who believe the protected tax-exempt IRS status, grants them some additional level of protection from state statutes.

Current Executive Director of Common Cause Allen with Common Cause Board Member Jim Harrington, Leanne Leith, a lobbyist for Conservation Voters of NM, and SAGE Council’s Executive Director Sonny Weahkee represent three of the five groups associated with Lee's Center for Civic Policy. the other two are, the League of Young Voters and the Southwest Organizing Project engaged in lobbying.

I did not capture representatives of LYV or SWOP engaged in lobbying. Tough SWOP Grants Administrator Marjorie Childress was present, one day, she was representing the New Mexico Independent, and not SWOP.

CVNM is a non-profit 501 (c) (4) organization. CVNM is a member of the Center for Civic Policy group, but their educational activities differ significantly. They use a scorecard of all 112 State Legislators to rank performance consistent with their agenda.

Allen made it clear that Common Cause dose not engage in voter Registration activities and would not have been affected by the Ryan bill.

Coffee Break...

OK, I thought the coffee fund wasn't paid by taxpayers.

Not withstanding the admonition against food or drink, coffee seems the beverage of choice early in the morning for legislators in committee.

Sens. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, D, Bernalillo County, left and George K. Munoz , D, Cibola and McKinley Counties partake.

In an earlier post I made reference to a coffee fund. I had sought a clarification on how the coffee fund worked, but did not get an answer before posting. I asked in an e-mail to one of the committee's analysts, Matt Baca:
"I have a question about the refreshments that are provided in the Senate Rules committee room specifically. Who funds that food and drink?"

I have since gotten a response:

“Interesting. The food doesn't come into play much,” Baca wrote. "Laine [Renfero-Sedillo, above left,] (the committee secretary) cooks the fritatas every morning, I'm not sure where the juices came from; probably from the coffee shop downstairs. "

"When we ran out of water and coffee a few weeks ago I bought some," Baca wrote, "David Ortiz also cooked a few times. " Ortiz, above, is the Assistant Sergeant at Arms for the Senate and staffs the Rules committee. Here he provides an updated draft of a bill to Sen. Ingle.

“Sometimes a lobbyist will offer to pay (Dick Minzner bought breakfast burritos for the committee the second to last Friday - also from the coffee shop) or will reimburse Laine,” wrote Baca.

Inquiring about the practice on the House side, each committee seems to handle the issue of food and drink in their own way. Some have coffee funds, to which the legislators contribute, while some committee chairs provide for their members. It seems that lobbyists on occasion also will provide refreshments.

My point of the cost of technicians may have been off target. However, even if there is no government money involved in any coffee funds my point was that the cost of video technicians to run cameras of the senate floor doesn't amount to a pile of discarded coffee ground in the grand scheme of things.

The New Mexico Independent's Trip Jennings is reporting, "Guv: More ethics reform for special session possible."

There is a continuing groundswell for ethics reform legislation according to Heath Haussamen on New Mexico Politics posting, "Momentum for reform was 'too great' to resist."

A special session seems inevitable, because of the federal stimulus money coming to the State. It is likely that the session would be called after the Legislative Council's July's consensus report. Some believe it would happen a couple months later so that early spending figures may be included in the analysis. However, a special session could be completed in a matter of days and ethics reform legislation does not hold the same allure as does divvying up money.

One Final Weird Note.

During the Domestic Partnership debate on SB 12 sponsored by Sen. McSorley, the archdiocese weighed in questioning the morality of the bill.

Several groups, bloggers and those commenting on such sites raised the church’s involvement in the debate, claiming at least three things: that the theory of separation of church and state, should have kept the church out of the debate, the church’s entry into the debate should threaten the Catholic’s Internal Revenue 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt status, and the church was wrong in their stand.

A quick dissection would show that the Catholic Church stated its moral opposition on an issue. They do that all the time on issues that don’t raise the ire in less controversial issues. Others do to.

Many people miss the meaning of the theory of separation of church and state. The First Amendment states, in part:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof:..

It means that state may not adopt or impose a religion on the citizenry and the second part means that the state may not keep any citizen from exercising their particular religion or if they chose, no particular religion.

The IRS’ 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt status is used to keep church’s from endorsing or campaigning for or against candidates, not from stating their beliefs.

Nothing could be more hypocritical than to suggest that one tax-exempt organization should have its status lifted for something considered legal under the rules by supporters of groups who appear to be violating those same rules.

As to the question of whether the church was wrong in their stand, I’ll leave to the interested parties. I don’t have a dog in this fight: I’m neither married or a Catholic. I believe in equal rights for People and don’t think that governments should establish laws that support one kind of protection at the expense of others based on those distinctions that differ us. Those distinctions are what Jefferson termed as unalienable rights, including the freedom to not be discriminated based on: race, religion, creed, color, age, sex, national origin, or gender identity.

The issue was defeated in this session of the legislature.

In assisting, then Sandoval County Clerk, Victoria Dunlap with a due process issue related to her issuing marriage licenses, it appears that based on the States Constitution’s Sec. 18, Due process; equal protection; sex discrimination clause and The New Mexico Human Rights Act amendment prohibits discrimination based on the definitions of several descriptions including: sexual orientation and gender identity, it is legal to issue licenses to "couples." However, no one is willing to challenge the right to exercise the law. The licenses issued by Dunlap were never challenged in court and are legal today.

Gov. Richardson, above, after a bill signing in Albuquerque, told Peter St. Cyr, in the gray shirt, that he is willing to put Domestic Partnership on the call for a special session, but only if both sides can agree on some common language.

Disclosure

I have been working with Harold Morgan, a 40-year professional journalistic acquaintance. Most recently we have been working on Capitol Report New Mexico. It started as a magazine a couple of years ago and then went into hibernation and has been revived as a newsprint product when the Rio Grande Foundation purchased it. The Rio Grande Foundation is a 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt, non-profit research institute.

I have no direct dealing with the foundation, nor do they pay me. Other than having taken pictures of the President, Paul Gessing for his column and one for their self-promotion ad. Morgan, the writers, columnists, and I are free from any outside editorial influence. Other than newsprint, rather than slick magazine paper stock, and black and white printing, rather than color, the content is virtually the same.

Jeff Jones to the Cops

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer Jeff Jones is hanging up his reporter's kit for a badge.

He’s joining Albuquerque Police Department’s 103rd Academy class that commences training May 27.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Ten years ago, Jones was on the crime beat and reported on my altercations with the Police Oversight Commission and Internal Affairs. He was able to report on details of the investigation because IA investigators and supervisors fed him erroneous information. That's not surprising, but Jones failed as a reporter by not asking for the other side of the story; mine.

Later, when the criminal charges against me were dismissed, at trial, after the prosecution failed to present a prima facie case, Jones did not follow up for more than two weeks, and only then, when reporting that my attorney's case was dismissed.

Jones would blame his editors; It took awhile, but Jones and I have a collegial relationship.

Jones will probably make a pretty good cop; He was a pretty good journalist.

Click on photo to see enlarged.

He knows how to talk with power, as he's seen here with Journal Photographer Roberto Rosales, left, interviewing Michelle Lujan Grisham, Oct. 11, 2007, when she announced her run for the Democratic nomination New Mexico’s Congressional District 1.

Jones also knows how to count, as he recalls details after the Feb. 3, 2008, US Sen. Hilary Clinton's Democratic pre-caucus rally at Highland High School.

Jones writes a story after covering a rally for Governor Bill Richardson's Democratic Presidential run to drum up support to have volunteers do campaign work before the Iowa caucus. He is seated below KOAT TV Photojournalist J.P. Hyso. The Journal and KOAT have a cooperative agreement to cover news and trade weather reports.

Those are three pretty basic qualities to be a good police officer.

Jones is 39, which sounds old to be getting into this business. It’s not unheard of or all that uncommon. His life experiences should serve him well.

So, good luck to Jeff in a new career where a few journalists have made a home.

Now whose going to write the news?

Faster than a Speeding Electron

What’s wrong with this picture?

Political blogger Matt Reichbach, AKA NMFBIHOP, dropped a bomb this morning; he’s quitting.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Reichbach has been at it for three years and thousands of posts.

He’s a political blogger and has established such close contacts he breaks information, even faster than radio news. Now that’s a feat.

Reichbach is pretty much a one sided journalist. His beat is the Democratic Party. He was a backpack reporter, using multi media formats to enhance his coverage.

He’s parlayed his work into more work; he writes for the New Mexico Independent and hosts a radio program.

Now Reichbach’s not actually leaving the electronic world, he’s just trying to go even faster. He’s going to Twitter.

Twitter, is a form of text messaging that is constrained to 140 characters. He already has two sites a personal one, @fbihop, at and the blog site, @nmfbihop.

My Take.

As traditional journalist and the rest of society wrestle with the future of the dead tree form of reporting, he is leading his generation further away from newsprint.

Reichbach is leading the revolution.

The younger generation wants its information faster. I’m not sure that Twittering provides our younger members of society with the necessary amount of information to be sufficiently aware, in the political sense, to be enlightened voters.

I have the sense that the Twitter generation wants tomorrow’s news yesterday.

Reichbach is going to try to get them there.

I do too many obituaries; I've never done one for a living guy; you're a first.

Or, could it just be the Day?

No Shootout with the Sheriff

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This is the New Mexico Independent’s Managing Editor David Alire Garcia's, reflection in the glass, while working in the Senate press gallery of the State Capitol in Santa Fe during the recent death penalty debate. The plaque next to the entry door reads “Print Media Gallery.” The Roundhouse was opened in 1966. The print media is not what it used to be. The print media still exists, but television and other non-print media now share the room. There are a lot more people in the room these days than there were 40 years ago.

Alire Garcia wrote a commentary based on a blog posting by Santa Fe County Sheriff Greg Solano, calling it the, "most interesting Roundhouse postmortem, in my humble opinion."

Solano, right, writes a blog, quaintly entitled, “Sheriff Greg Solano Blog The online ramblings of the Sheriff of Santa Fe County, Santa Fe New Mexico.”

It’s a must read for me. Our profession binds us. When I first met him, I was very active as a police union leader in Albuquerque and he was a rookie with the Santa Fe Police Department. Santa Fe cops were in the beginning stages of forming a union and consulted me in how to proceed with their city government. Over the years, Solano would attend State Fraternal Order of Police conferences and it became clear that he was a quiet, thoughtful and articulate young officer. It was no surprise to me that he would be engaged in protecting officers as President of the Santa Fe Police Officers Association and would become more political and advanced through the ranks. His election to Sheriff was the culmination of his years of hard and dedicated work. His reelection in 2006 assures him his position through 2010, when he is term limited out of office. He has already announced his intention to seek the 2010 Democratic Lieutenant Governors primary nomination.

I was about to post an entry on why lobbyists should not be treated as pariahs. However, Solano jumped up with this issue, which takes precedence. The lobbyists will be along shortly.

Solano writes:

"Has the legislature become beholden to the media?"

This is not the first time Solano has written about politicians and the media.

Solano’s premise is, that the media has its own agenda and it was displayed this legislative session by wielding "undue influence" on legislators.

Solano asks:

“Should the media once they switch gears from just reporting the news to pushing an agenda be forced to register as lobbyists? Or is the media out of line?”

Solano concludes,

“Would anyone in the media dare to write an editorial exclaiming that the media has had undue influence and the legislature has become beholden to the media lobby? I will not hold my breath.”

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Solano is correct, but for the wrong reason. I, like many others in the media, are not going to write that we have "undue" influence over the legislature, because that is the role of the media, to push the public agenda.

He has broad shoulders and broad authority, he just got off track. He knows the oath he took and is very articulate about it. It's easy to do when issues become emotional. It seems that he sees the media watchdog role getting a little yappy.

The 1790’s press, which the First Amendment was written to protect, was a purely ”political press.” Political parties owned printing presses.

The press has been referred to as the Fourth Estate, as a check on government. Even elected officials who were not enamored with the press recognized the importance of the media in the operation of government. Thomas Jefferson wrote in 1787:

The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.

Over the years, the idea of how the press should operate has continually changed.

There has been a school of thought that reporters should simply be flies on the wall, watching events and reporting on outcomes. Asking questions of participants doesn’t always reveal the motives of the political players.

Blogging, depending on the particular blogger, seems to be returning to the political press, as known by the first Congress that was voted into office, based on our Constitution, when they drafted what would become the First Amendment.

When politicians don’t want to have their actions scrutinized, it is the duty of the media to push and to push hard.

This session happened to align itself through a series of events, some caused by the ham fisted and overbearing manner of the legislative leadership in trying to shut down their self mandated openness. Some because of the lack of money shifted the focus to other items. Some of it was because of the emphasis placed on the number of ethics bills and the importance that the media decided those bills should have. Some in the media argue that people are frustrated by the corruption cases of recent years and are demanding something be done. The legislators must have been hearing the same thing based upon the number of bills submitted covering a wide range of ethics topics.

When the Senate committee on committees, just prior to the opening of the session, decided to thwart a piece of legislation which would have assured C-SPAN style gavel-to-gavel coverage of floor sessions. They, had to overrule their own majority. The committee's majority claimed webcasting would be too expensive during the economic crisis. No one bought their line. A previously passed bill provided for the purchase and placement of a three-camera video system for webcasting their floor actions.

In a multi billion dollar budget the cost of a couple of technicians for the 60-day session couldn’t exceed by much, the coffee fund.


However, it's not just coffee, it's also feeding legislators breakfast at morning committee meetings. The food was delivered by the Assistant Sergeant at Arms David Ortiz, left, and the Committee assistant, Michael Riley, right above.


Here are Senate Minority Leader Stuart Ingle, R, Chaves, Curry, De Baca and Roosevelt Counties. left and President Pro Tem Timothy Jennings, D, Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln and Otero Counties, eating Breakfast Burritos in the Senate Rules Committee room.


They were two of the members of the Senate committee on committees who voted to remove the installed cameras from the chamber. Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, D, Valencia County, sits on the Senate Rules Committee with Committee Chair Linda Lopez, Bernalillo County, both had voted against commencing the webcasting of the floor. Having four of the eight Senators who voted against webcasting made Rules an easy choice as the committee to cover. That and it being the funnel of all ethics bills. 

I don't have a problem with legislators eating or that food and refreshments are served, even if it is on the public's dime. What I object to is the hypocrisy of claiming the legislature can't afford a few thousand dollars for a couple of video technicians. The salaries and employee benefits of just the senate side employees for the 60-day session is $2,830,400, according to the feed bill. What's another few thousand dollars to open up government to the people.

No, the reason was Senate and House leaders don’t want to be seen by the public on an electronic medium. In the shadows of the well of the Senate, there is an obscurity of being hidden in plain sight. Further, they are masked by complex procedural rules that the ordinary citizen, governmental employees, sometimes journalists, and even legislators have difficulty understanding. Those in control, either ignore their own rules or they refuse to follow the interpretation of their own parliamentarian. To watch creates an impenetrable fog.

When the media calls the system to account, that is not pushing some agenda that only benefits them, it is pushing the people’s agenda. Openness must be the first order of government. If the procedures are shrouded or closed, then the process is already corrupted.

The people, as found in the preambles of the Constitutions of the United States of America and the State of New Mexico; the “We the People….” The people who, in setting up their governments limited those elected, appointed and hired to act for all of us, had no intention of having them exclude themselves from continuous accountability.

Senate Rules 23-3 reads:

Passes shall be issued by the chief clerk to duly accredited members of the press, radio and television, which allow them the privileges enumerated herein. At the chief clerk's rostrum, an area of four or five seats may be made available for the writing press. During the committee of the whole, television cameramen may be allowed on the floor to photograph the speaker. Television and still photographers may be allowed on the corners of the lieutenant governor's rostrum for purposes of photographing senators and senate activities. A sergeant-at-arms shall be posed to prohibit visitors from the two press boxes. Passes shall also be issued by the chief clerk at the request of and to be countersigned by the senator or the president for the period designated by the senator or the president to members of the senator's or president's family or special guests as evidence of the privileges granted under other rules passed by the senate granting such privileges

I for one try not to acquire press passes under the theory that I don’t ask permission to exercise my constitutional rights. Government does not get to determine who the press is.

The best quote, on determining who the press is, came from United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, who said in Los Angeles Police Department v. United Reporting Publishing Corporation:

I assume journalistic purposes under this statute could be somebody who has a Xerox machine in his basement.

Websites were included by the petitioner's lawyer in response to Scalia's observation.

There are rare occasions when you have little choice. The Secret Service is one of those circumstances that can force you to play their game. However, it is actually campaign dictated. Here are eight press passes I gathered during last year's presidential campaign and one presidential visit. Only the White House pass had my name and affiliation on it. There were several McCain events where no credentials were issued. Their attitude, except when Sarah Palin visited was that the press was welcome. Hilary Clinton's event was stricter than her husband's, where the campaign ran out of credentials.

Last year, near the end of the session I was forced by a Senate Sergeant at Arms to get a pass. It seems that legislative staff members were using the press gallery as a lunch break room. It was a strange session as there were reports of the wireless system going down with rumors that the Governor's office claiming that the press was using up all the bandwidth.

The weirdest thing about the Senate pass, was during the election campaign, while proving who I was at security checks, the mere sight of this pass ended all discussion and I was passed right through. The pass doesn't even have a name on it.

The way things are covered nowadays are drastically different than they were almost 40 years ago when the Albuquerque Journal’s Legislative Reporter Ed Mahr, upper left, posed Representative Harold Runnels, seated, and an unidentified member for Journal photographer Ray Cary, right, in the House chambers, circa 1970-72.

The gallery was packed to capacity during the death penalty debate. The journalists are: Albuquerque Journal's Staff Writer Dan Boyd, reflection in the window, the New Mexico Independent's Trip Jennings and KOAT TV's Santa Fe Bureau Reporter Larry Behrens, Santa Fe Reporter's David Maass, KRQE TV's Kaitlin McCarthy, Santa Fe Bureau Reporter Doland, Albuquerque Journal's Photographer Dean Hanson, and KOB TV's Stuart Dyson, standing with four videographers.

The Santa Fe New Mexican’s Capitol Reporter Steve Terell, left, and a staff photorapher were in the room, along with the scribe from New Mexico Legislative Reports, lower right.

The gallery quickly thinned with the television cameras moving out. Bloggers were the ones most interested in the webcam debate.

During my cooperative efforts in webcasting the Senate Rules Committee, Sen. Kent Cravens, R, Bernalillo County, above right, asked that the webcasters identify themselves. The New Mexico Independent’s Reporter/Blogger Gwyenth Doland, above left, introduced herself and explained that we were live casting the committee meetings. I introduced myself as providing the video feed to NMI.

My cohort, Ched MacQuigg, above, chose to stand silent under the theory of Quo Warranto, a Latin legal phrase that literally means show me your warrant, your grant of power that authorizes you to ask such a question. MacQuigg is a bit prickly when it comes to being confronted by authority, and with good reason. My belief was, Cravens was helping our cause, not challenging it.

Later in the day, Senate Majority Leader Sanchez, had a Sergeant at Arms, above right, seek me out in the press gallery to ask for whom I worked.

At the beginning of the final floor debate on Senate webcasting, Sanchez, standing, called me out, by name, “Mark, the webcaster,” several times, and after waving and making visual contact he said, “My daughter Katrina, says Hi.”

Katrina Sanchez was a classmate of mine a year ago and is a receptionist at the Communications and Marketing Department of the University of New Mexico, where I have several acquaintances and friends. I had discussed with Ms. Sanchez the webcasting and her father’s reluctance over the issue. In talking to Ms. Sanchez since, she had no problem with her father using her name, and said it was his way of saying, that, if I had a question about his position, ask him, not her. Now she’s known him all of her life, so she has an advantage in understanding how he communicates, but he and I have stood only feet apart and I had no direct question for him. He's not spoken to me except from the floor.

Our webcasting coverage has been to provide: clear, in focus, close up images of legislators engaged in the public debate. On the commentary side of my role as a journalist, I’ll point out photographically, with still and video images, along with my writing, issues I think are of importance for the public to consider.

I exercise news judgement in making editorial decisions as to what I find important. My audience has to go alone with me. If they don't like where I take them, they're free to follow someone else.

If I also have legislators reading my take on issues, then so much the better. Suggesting that exercising my rights, and everybody else’s right to openly comment, through whatever medium they chose, does not make the effort undue influence, but a protected constitutional right.

Just one last thought, Solano thinks the media should be required to register as lobbyists. However, I wouldn't be required under the current law because I'm not paid. I believe in a free press and what I've done with the legislature this year, I have done for free.

Exhale and take a deep breath Greg! No shots fired. Sorry, your issue was dead on arrival. The sun will rise and the media will try to pump as much light into the Capitol and every other government building as they can.

Manny’s Arrogance

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Former State Senator Manny Aragón, D, of Valencia and Bernalillo Counties’ District 14, South Valley was sentenced to five years and seven months in federal prison for his part in skimming $4.3 million from the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Courthouse construction.

Seen here before the Metropolitan Courthouse with one of his attorneys, Ray Twohig, leaving the Federal Courthouse, Aragón was ordered to pay $750,000 in fines and to additionally pay restitution on $1.5 million to be shared with his co conspirators.

The sentencing hearing lasted three and a half hours before Federal District Judge William P. Johnson.

Aragón refused to make a comment or answer any questions posed by members of the assembled media.

Two years ago, I wrote about the arraignments of four of the eventual seven people charged and all plead guilty in the conspiracy.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

United States Attorney Greg Fouratt, center, speaking before the Pete V. Domenici Federal courthouse across the street for the edifice of the corruption, said the "the era of picking the taxpayers' pockets is over."

The amount of money illegally diverted was more than $4 million, according to Fouratt’s statement on the courthouse steps.

Listen to Fouratt talk with the press.

So why is restitution for the conspirators limited to $1.9 million? Where did the other $2 million go?

There are some lingering questions. Several other large public construction projects with cost overruns were allegedly under investigation three years ago, including the Bernalillo County District Courthouse, the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Detention Center, and the Anderson-Abruzzo International Balloon Museum that have now evaporated into the ether. We don’t know that there was wrongdoing in those projects. There were rumblings that there were active investigations and possibly grand juries looking into the matter. Several people who have pleaded guilty in the Metropolitan Courthouse case were involved in those construction projects as well. There has not been a public accounting of them.

Grand juries are supposed to be secret. There were leaks and implications about who might be under investigation. Once information leaks there should be an announcement saying what, if anything came of the investigation. It does not require a lot of detail. However, if the grand jury presented a "no bill," meaning they did not find probable cause to believe, either there was a crime committed, or the person investigated had probably committed the crime, it would be good to clear the rumor generated by leaks.

My Take

I had three distinct encounters with Aragón over the years:

Aragón represented a woman whom I arrested for a 1983, Driving While Intoxicated and related charges. His cross-examination of me was probably the second harshest attack I had from an attorney.

The toughest cross-examination was from ACLU Chief Trial Attorney, William Kunstler, right.

I understood the difference between Kunstler’s tough and Aragón’s bullying. Due to the lessons learned in preparation for Kunstler, Aragón was easy. His tactic was to try to confuse me with rapid fire hypothetical questions which changed slightly and then ask if the differences changed my answers as they applied to his client, who when she took the stand agreed with every charge I made against heard including the breath alcohol read out of .126 percent.

Aragón did not irritate me as much as he irritated Metropolitan Court Judge Burton C. Cosgrove. The judge got to a point where he suspended the hearing momentarily to get a tape recorder threatening Aragón with a disciplinary complaint before the State Bar. Ultimately the client was convicted. The case was appealed in District Court before Judge Richard Traub. Aragón did not handle the appeal. I testified and was cross-examination with little fan fare. The woman under her own direct examination admitted to having taken the breath test and observing the machines indication as .12%. She said she felt that she should not be found guilty because, “the officer had been rude to her.”

Traub dismissed the case. I won’t say the fix was in, but there was no evidence presented, even from her testimony, which would have lead to anything but a conviction.

Then Albuquerque Mayor Ken Schultz, appointed Aragón's law partner, Jim Foley as City Attorney. The office required approval of the City Council. Aragón was made Chief Trial Attorney. Foley seemed to be a figurehead and Aragón appeared to run the office. The title “Chief Trial Attorney” meant little, as Aragón never made it into a courtroom representing the city.

In 1986, as President of the Albuquerque Police Officers Association, I attended a couple of meetings held with Aragón, about the settlement of a lawsuit which alleged an officer, represented by the APOA, had used excessive force. The topic of discussion centered on how the settlement figure had been leaked to the Albuquerque Journal. Concerns expressed at these meetings were the impetus to the department's Internal Self Evaluation Task Force. The task force led to the creation of an Independent Review Officer and years later was expanded to become the Police Oversight Commission. Aragón told me to warn the APOA attorney that City deals with the union were a thing of the past, that there, “was a new Sheriff in town.” My response was that I was handling the case for the union’s interest, not our lawyer.

The APOA membership voted that I not have any dealing with Aragón, for they adamantly disliked and distrusted him. I explained that the APOA did not get to decide for the city as to whom they sent to the table. I defied my membership’s will with the promises that I would never give Aragón anything that the city would not have gotten on their own without him and he would not enjoy dealing with me. He met one more time and I never saw him in that capacity again.

I organized and moderated a Police Labor Seminar in 1992 for the New Mexico State Lodge of the Fraternal Order of Police. I invited State Senate President Pro Tem Aragón as a speaker because he had sponsored a Senate Bill on statewide collective bargaining for state, county and municipal workers that session. He’d been quoted in the Sunday February 26, 1989, Albuquerque Journal, that, during debate on the bill, he found the City of Albuquerque's Labor-Management Relations Ordinance was, "one of the most poorly written documents I've ever seen."

After lunch, the prosecution team led by Fouratt and accompanied by Assistant U.S. Attorneys including Paula Burnett, returned to court to sentence one of Aragón’s co-defendants.
This is co-defendant Raul Parra, above right with his attorney Robert Gorance on their way to court with the Bernalillo County Metropolitan Courthouse behind them.

Parra, left, an audio-visual contractor, filed false and inflated invoices where much of the illegally diverted funds were generated, and he was sentenced to 45 months and ordered to pay $611,000 in restitution.

The other co-defendants: former Albuquerque Mayor Schultz, architect Marc Schiff, then construction manager, Michael Murphy, electronics subcontractor Manuel Guara, former Metropolitan Court Administrator Toby Martinez and his wife Sandra Mata Martinez, all pleaded guilty and are awaiting sentence.

Parody. No Seriously, It’s a Parody.

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This is rookie State Senator John Sapien, D, Sandoval County.

He led a parliamentary procedural charge using Senate rules Saturday night that has put a speed bump in the road to public access in allowing the public to watch the State Senate activities on the Internet.

Sen. Mark Boitano’s bill, SB 401 and resolution, SR 3 addresses webcasting. The issue has been addressed since passage of a different sponsored Boitano action back in 2005. Boitano is a Republican from Bernalillo County.

On Saturday evening when Senate Resolution 3, “Senate Live Audio and Video Web Streaming,” came to the floor, Sapien was prepared to introduce three amendments.

Sapien first complaint was about the use of legislative council generated video for political purposes. Sapien may not have realized what was in the resolution and bill. Boitano made reference to his Italian heritage and referenced the old Prego spagetti sauce commercial, by telling Sapien, “it’s in there.”

Sapien proposed his first amendment; it created a "senate streaming oversight committee." The amendment failed.

Sapien’s second amendment read:

(b) the live video stream shall be from a single camera installed at the rear of the chamber, positioned and focused so as to capture an image of the chamber that as nearly as possible replicates the view of a member of the public seated in the gallery in such a way that no material on members' desks, computer monitors or similar devices can be read or viewed;

The amendment passed. Sapien withdrew his third amendment saying, that with the passage of the second, the last one was unnecessary.

There was a “call of the house,” a parliamentary procedure to compel the attendance of all Senators before the motion on the amended bill be taken. Under this procedure, the doors are locked and the sergeant-at-arms were issued warrants to arrest all unexcused Senators and bring them before the bar. They are permitted to make their excuse. If their excuse is not accepted, the President of the Senate Lt. Gov. Diane Denish would impose a fine that has to be paid in cash before the Senator is allowed to take their seat and act under their charge of office.

This is serious stuff. If a Senator can not be located, or they can not pay their fine, their inability to act is a further violation of their rules requiring them to vote on every issue, unless they have a conflict of interest.

The group of Senators who made the “call of the house,” withdrew their request when it became clear that the sergeants-at-arms were apparently unable to locate the missing members. The floor leader agreed to put off the final vote until the entire Senate was in session.

Santa Fe Reporter Weekly Newspaper writer Dave Maass described Sapien’s amendments as “poison pills.” Amendments to a resolution alter the voting requirements from a simply majority to a two-thirds majority. Apparently legislative watchers, political handicappers and even Senators counting votes indicated that the measure did not have the two-thirds support.

Maass was not the first to indicate that there was poison in the ethics reform well. Democracy for New Mexico’s Barbara Wold’s take on slow moving ethics bills in the Senate Rules Committee.

Executive Director for the Center for Civic Policy Eli Il Yong Lee, left, who is also the registered lobbyist for the companion Center for Civic Action, wrote that House and Senate Majority Floor Leaders: Rep. Ken Martinez and Sen. Michael Sanchez, who were proposing legislation that would require organizations engaged in voter registration to be registered.

Lee sees it as another attack on nonprofits, which many see as being involved in political activity in conflict with the IRS’ tax-exempt status.

The two centers: for Civic Policy, and Action, are registered with the Secretary of State’s office as charitable, educational and social welfare domestic nonprofits.

The nonprofits attempt to make a distinction between permissible educational activities and engaging in what is already defined in the law as:

"political purpose" means influencing or attempting to influence an election or pre-primary convention, including a constitutional amendment or other question submitted to the voters;

Statutory Chapters in New Mexico Statutes Annotated 1978, Chapter 1, Elections, Article 4, Registration of Electors
1-4-49 Third-party registration agents; registration required; procedures; reports; penalty. Section 1. Section 1-4-49 NMSA 1978

Yet, Lee does not offer a bright line test upon which his nonprofits may rely to determine what is done in the name of education. Others see it more likely a guise for attempting to poison the election pool. There is no bright line; at best, a diffused one. 

Lee, and his nonprofit associates have filed a lawsuit to prevent the Secretary of State and the Attorney General from moving to threaten the tax-exempt status of the organizations.

Sen. John Ryan, right, R, Bernalillo County, introduced SB 247, Election Agent Registration Requirements.

It would add to the requirements already in law and possibly already covered, but not adhered to, so as to clarify:
“C. Organizations employing registration agents or using volunteer registration agents are required to register pursuant to the Campaign Reporting Act.”

Section 2. Section 1-19-26 NMSA 1978 (being Laws 1979, Chapter 360, Section 2, as amended). Ryan’s bill proposes amending it further to read:
1-19-26. DEFINITIONS. As used in the Campaign Reporting Act:
L. "political committee"….

(1) political action committees or similar organizations composed of employees or members of any corporation, labor organization, trade or professional association or any other similar group that raises, collects, expends or contributes money or any other thing of value for a political purpose;

The additional relevant language Ryan wants added is:

(4) an organization defined by the internal revenue service as a 501(c)(4) organization or another organization that has unlimited ability to lobby for legislation and participate in political campaigns, whose net earnings are devoted exclusively to charitable, educational or recreational purposes and that also promotes social welfare;
and
(5) an organization employing registration agents or using volunteer registration agents to register voters pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 4 NMSA 1978.

The act, on the books already defines:

M. "political purpose" means influencing or attempting to influence an election or pre-primary convention, including a constitutional amendment or other question submitted to the voters;

When the audience was asked who opposed the bill, a number of nonprofits rose in adamant opposition, including Policy Director for the Center for Civic Policy Matt Brix, left, Director, American Civil Liberties – New Mexico, Northern Regional Office Diane Wood, center, and Political Director for the Association of Federal State County and Municipal Employees in New Mexico Carter Bundy, right.

They defended the rights of 501(c)(3) organizations, even though the bill specifically does not mention them.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Has the place gone to the birds?

This is the Wildlife Center’s Executive Director Katherine Eagleson with a Red tail hawk in the rotunda on Friday.

My Take

This is rookie State Senator John Sapien, D, Sandoval County. Is there an echo in here?

Sapien, center, is being photographed by Albuquerque Journal Photographer Roberto Rosales with Sen. Michael Sanchez and the new University of New Mexico Head Football Coach Mike Locksley, in red.

The Senate invited Locksley to coach their team in the Legislators Basketball game, that evening. The Senate lost to the House 61-51.

What was the Senate thinking, inviting the head FOOTBALL coach to lead the basketball team?

Every once in a while, a bill will comes along that is described as "a full employment act for lawyers." because it will surely be litigated at every turn.

If Boitano’s bill, SB 401 "Legislative Audio and Video Streaming Webcasts," is not passed and the resolution, not made workable, webcasting will stall again. Boitano is a Republican from Bernalillo County.

I am a great believer in open coverage of governments.

I wordsmithed the protocols used by Rep. Janice Arnold Jones in her House effort. They were based on the U.S. House rules as seen on C-SPAN.

However, Boitano’s bill and resolution were severely flawed in my opinion.

The problem was that Senators were trying to dictate professional standards and techniques that should have been made through regulation, not law. The legislation should have required the director of the legislative council service and the chief clerk of the senate who would control the production, to develop protocols and technical standards for the video camera operators to follow. The mission statement being, to webcast the events of the Senate in a way that accurately informs the citizenry of the proceedings of their government. A secondary consideration is to maintain the dignity of the body.

I wrote Boitano early in the process through one of his consultants:

When you speak to Sen. Mark Boitano about his SB401 I suggest that he remove the do's and don'ts and write that the council services shall establish protocols and guidelines for the video/audio coverage of the Senate in keeping with the decorum of the body.
For every rule that can be written, an exception can be found.
For example:
"(5) at no time shall the live video image be of the gallery; and"
What happens when a Senator wishes to acknowledge some person or group for some outstanding feat or achievement, like driving to Santa Fe, and the Senator points out Ms. Smith's eighth grade civics class?
Let the professionals determine what are the professional standards; then hold them to the standards.
Employees who are properly trained will behave; if they don't can them.

Boitano responded, but it seemed the language was locked down.

The Senate has purchased high quality, state of the art equipment, but is refusing to implement its use.

The use of small stationary cameras, like this one used by New Mexico Independent's Gwyneth Doland, don't add to the debate. When the camera can not zoom in on a speaker, it perpetuates the thinking that Sapien relied upon in his sucessfull, one-camera amendment.

Someone’s going to have to keep an eye on things. This is a Screech Owl from the Wildlife Center in Espanola.

Sapien, and those who do not want video webcasting, are going to get it anyway.

The defeat of a reasonable bill will become a full employment act for video webcasting. Next year, instead of attending college classes, I will be lugging my video equipment to the Senate press box and provide webcast coverage of the floor. One of the things that the Senators won’t want is that I will make my own editorial decisions. All the things they fear are fair game, as my work is protected under the First Amendment. Though I am unlikely to go out of my way to make anyone look bad; it could happen.

Just by way of example, on Friday, as we waited hopefully for the webcasting issue to come up, I chose to make a little experimental video. My parameters were: to tape the individual Senators on the floor. I would run tape for 10 to 15 seconds, of each legislator, accepting whatever they did. I would also violate the sections on looking over their shoulders at phones and such.

This is the Blackberry of a bored government official during the Senate Rules committee.

The floor came to a stand still when Sen. Lopez asked for some time to have an amendment that was being drawn up. In the interim Majority Floor Leader Sanchez volunteered to tell a joke. It became the underling audio track for this two minute video.

Sen. Nancy Rodriguez owes me a debt of thanks for not using the 11 seconds of her activity. I’m a hard bitten old crime scene photographer, but I couldn’t bring myself to show her. I invoked the Queens rule; No photographs of the Queen after she picks up the first eating utensil, at a meal, until the clinking of a glass to summon the attention before proposing a toast.

Sen. Michael Sanchez has commented to reliable roundhouse sources, about how much he dislikes the continued presence of video cameras during our Senate Rules coverage. If he doesn’t want the Senate to be made to look bad, then maybe he shouldn’t lead the pack.

According to Santa Fe New Mexican's Steve Terrell, who in past years has written about knowing the session is over when Sen. John Pinto, D, McKinley and San Juan Counties will sing “The Potato Song.”

He sang Friday night. It was the second time this session. Pinto, along with President Pro Tempore Timothy Jennings, D, Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln and Otero Counties, are the longest serving members of the Senate, since 1977. Pinto’s probably right; in New Mexico he may well serve as the fat lady. It’s over.

In Defense of the Canada Goose

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

US Airways Flight 1549 had a mishap Jan. 15, 2009, shortly after take off from New York’s LaGuardia airport. At an altitude of about 2,800 feet, the airplane encountered a flock of birds. The Airbus 320 ingested birds through both CFM56-5B4/P turbo fan engines.

First Officer Jeffrey B. Skiles, on his first A 320 flight assignment after training, was at the controls when the birds were hit.

“I’ve got the aircraft,” Captain Chesley Burnett "Sully" Sullenberger III was recorded saying, as he took over control of the aircraft while the engines lost all thrust.

The Internet is a wonderful communications device. Every once in a while, someone will make an observation that must have made sense in their head when their fingers stroked their thoughts to the world.

I read a comment that went something like this, “Man has been flying for a hundred years. You’d think they would have found a way to avoid hitting birds.”

Aviation is a high tech world. There are a lot of advanced technological pieces of equipment incorporated into aircraft and used by the Federal Aviation Administration’s Air Traffic Control facilities.

Radar can be attuned to detect small flying objects. A flock of large birds can be seen on a radarscope. As a normal procedure, the radar screen’s brightness and contrast are not set to pick up birds.

Aircraft under radar control use a transponder, an electronic signature assigned to a particular aircraft to identify it. Every time a radar beacon sweeps a transponder, the aircraft is shown as a bright readout with corresponding information including its: type, altitude, heading, and speed.

When I took this picture, years ago, the air traffic controller demonstrated the radar’s ability to track migratory flocks flying up and down the Rio Grande valley where they spend winters. The birds were flying between 1,300 and 1,800 feet above the river, directly in, but well above the approach path of landing aircraft.

The FAA reported, that upon review of its New York area radar data for Jan. 15, they determined after takeoff, the flock of birds was detectable. It doesn’t mean that the radar controller was able to see what was likely visible.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

The prime suspect is the Canada goose (Branta Canadensis), which is a good-sized bird.


The Canada has been flying the skies much longer than man. It doesn’t know or understand human ways. And it certainly doesn’t know what to do in front of airplanes taking off.

The airplane lifted off at 155 knots and as it climbed, it accelerated to 210 knots when the flaps were retracted; the maximum speed allowed was 250 knots; that’s 155 mph or 227 feet per second.

Skiles said he saw the birds just before he heard them hit the plane.

A friend of mine asked if Sullenberger was a hero?

The answer is an unqualified yes. He did everything correctly. He was faced with a nearly impossible situation, yet he made it work.

There used to be a joke about, you only think that pilots are taller than they are because they are sitting on their wallet. The rest of the story is that pilots aren’t paid for the routine; they’re paid for being able to handle the emergencies. It would have been easy to imagine the January 16 headlines, “155 Killed in N.J. Air Crash.”

The powered landing speed with gear down is 145 knots or 90 mph. The airplane probably has to be flown a little faster without the extra lift from the flaps; but at the same time both flaps and landing gear create drag.

Aviation experts on cable television said the A320 has a sink rate of 20:1. That’s 20 feet forward for every foot of altitude lost. This is a high glide ratio in the range of medium performance sailplanes.

From 3,000 feet, LaGuardia, Teterbro, and Newark airports were perceived to be beyond the range of the quickly descending aircraft.

Sullenberger also holds a glider rating as part of his impressive list of aviation accomplishments. That rating may have served him well. Though it wasn’t his normal sailplane, the same laws of physics apply. He had to shift mental gears, but he understood how the aircraft should act.

Pilots who have saved aircraft after major damage or fuel exhaustion have carried glider licenses in such incidents as: United Airlines flight 811 out of Honolulu, Hawaii in 1989 and the Canadian Air Gimli Glider.

Sullenberger’s choice of landing site was made for him by virtue of practical elimination. The only logical place to land was the Hudson River. His landing was a textbook glider landing, minus the glider, solid surface and landing gear.

Here is the BBC’s reporting.

Result, 155 lives got off that airplane. Worst injuries were a few broken bones.

Aviation News at AVweb.com’s Glen Pew has a good look.

My Take

Sullenberger and his crew are indeed heroes.

Glider experience has proven helpful and the Canada Goose will fly where it might.

Little Miss Sunshine

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

With no money available this legislative session because of diminishing oil and gas tax revenues and a sense of an ethical crisis, a number of pieces of legislation calling for reform have been introduced.

This is Senator Linda Lopez, D, Bernalillo County.

Her district 11 runs from the Rio Grande on the east, to the Rio Puerco on the west, and from Central Avenue and Interstate Highway 40 on the north to the Isleta Pueblo boundary, on the south; with a few cut out here and there. Senate district 11 abuts with districts: 12, Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, 14, Sen. , 22, Sen. Lynda Lovejoy, 23, Sen. Sander Rue, and 26, Sen. Bernadette Sanchez. All the districts are wholly or partially within Bernalillo County, except 22, which contains parts of Cibola, McKinley, Rio Arriba, and Sandoval Counties, 23, which contains part of Sandoval County and 14, which contains parts of Valencia County. All of the Senators from abutting districts are Democrats, except Rue, who is a Republican.

Lopez Chair’s the Senate Rules committee. The committee is considered to be rather powerful and if one looks at its make up, you can understand why.

There are five Democrats; Lopez, Vice Chair Peter Wirth, Santa Fe County, Majority Floor Leader Michael Sanchez, Valencia County, President Pro Tem Timothy Jennings, Chaves, Eddy, Lincoln and Otero Counties, and Dede Feldman, Bernalillo County.

On the Republican side: Minority Leader Stuart Ingle, Chaves, Curry, De Baca and Roosevelt Counties, and Dianna Duran, Dona Ana and Otero Counties, and Ranking Member Kent Cravens, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

All Senate Ethics bills started in the Rules committee. To the casual observer, the bills are bottlenecked. It is true that the Rules committee did not meet until early February, but the committee has a preexisting policy of not reporting out multiple bills on the same topic.

Lopez explained in a quiet, logical manner, the reasons why the Rules committee has adopted such a policy. She said multiple bills confuse legislators who tend to vote against them. The policy requires the sponsors of competing bills to work together to create a committee substitute.

Several activists, lobbyists and bill watchers are openly complaining that Lopez is obstructing the committee process while the bills are being reworked into substitutes.

Common Cause’s Executive Director Steven Robert Allen’s, right, position is that because New Mexico is one of a very few states that does not have campaign contribution limits; the legislature should not have to reinvent the wheel. There are plenty of models, some court tested, which can be readily adopted.

Democracy for New Mexico’s Barbara Wold, and Heath Haussamen on New Mexico Politics, based their comments, in part, after watching the video provided by the New Mexico Independent's Gwyneth Doland.

Doland has joined the glacier chorus.

One of the complaints was based on an extended debate Feb 25, on an “advice and consent of the Senate,” in the confirmation process of a reappointment to the Fish and Game Board. Ethics activists awaiting their bills became more than slightly irritated over the half-hour discussion of antelope hunting enforcement practices.

"I hope it becomes clear to many how much purposeful time wasting goes on in the committee," Wold wrote on the NMI transcript. "Who knew that antelope management was on the front burner(?)"

One may remember that antelope were a hot topic earlier in the year. Each piece of legislation is due its own proper hearing before the committees.

Analysis

Review

New Mexico’s legislature was designed by our State’s Constitution to follow the Federal Constitution’s model of a House and Senate.

The House is meant to be closest to the people and is therefore very reactive. The House is the larger body, with fewer constituents and each Representative is elected every two years.

The Senate is considered the deliberative body. In the Federal system, two Senators represent each State. The thinking within the Federalist system was to allow each state an equal voice. Senators were appointed by the states, but a Constitutional amendment changed that to allowing the people to directly elect them. They serve a six-year term on staggered cycles. A third of the Senate is elected each Congressional election.

17th Amendment, Senators Elected by Popular Vote.

The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.

When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.

This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.

It was ratified April 8, 1913.

Thomas Jefferson was in France when the Constitution was drafted. Upon his return, he asked fellow Virginian, George Washington, why a Senate? “We pour legislation into the senatorial saucer to cool it," Washington supposedly said.

In New Mexico’s legislature, Senators are elected every four years. At one point, half the Senate was elected every two years, but that was altered so they now are elected at the same time as the Presidential election.

My Take

I’ve been pointing video and still cameras at the legislature this session. The first interest was to get the House to seriously consider webcasting. Rep. Janice Arnold Jones, R, Bernalillo County, has been covering the House Taxation and Revenue and the House Voters and Elections committee meetings.

The House took steps to move towards webcasting their own meetings. The effort is limited and vigilance must be maintained to assure that the leadership, in spite of their rhetorical support, follows through.

Rep. Dennis Kintigh, Left, R, Chaves, Lincoln and Otero Counties, has this week, joined Arnold Jones in covering his assignments on the House Health and Government Affairs and House Judiciary committees.

My attention has turned to the Senate, which voted to reinstall the cameras in their chamber, but nothing has been streamed from there yet.

The Senate Rules Committee is our focus since they took up the ethics bills. With the assistance of Ched MacQuigg, of Diogenes' six, we have provided a live video feed to the New Mexico Independent several times.

The ethics legislation has attracted a fair amount of media attention. The Santa Fe New Mexican's Photographer Luis Sanchez-Saturno, above left, and KUNM FM's Reporter Scott Ki covered the meetings. KUNM FM's News Director and Reporter Jim Williams, below left, records witness testimony, while Albuquerque Journal Staff Writer Jeff Jones reports on the proceedings.

Wold wrote on her DFNM site, Feb. 25, in, NM Senate Rules Committee Continues Glacial Pace on Ethics Bills:

I have to admit I find it all a bit embarrassing to witness. What I'm seeing -- live and shamelessly presented -- appears to be a circus act organized to placate big donors and the status quo power bloc. And the people be damned. It can't just be me, can it?

Yes Barbara, it can be just you; and Stephen and Heath, and those others, who think that their particular interests, in their particular issue, is of vital importance to the exclusion of others. Maybe it’s why you shouldn’t watch sausage being made either. The political/legislative process is an ugly mess. It takes time, between being required to be on the floor, at other committee meetings, attending joint sessions to hear federal congressional delegation members speak, it’s hard to find the time to coordinate schedules and work out details. The negotiations are not always amicable. The issue differences are not always easily surrendered. It may take time and it may seem “glacial,” but it also may be moving at an appropriate pace.

Wold has been very hard on Sen. Lopez, as she carried a Tax Increment Development District bill that directly affects her district and future constituents.

To Wold, political demonizing has become standard fare. Lopez is not viewed as a Progressive, by Progressives and is not always regarded highly by other Democrats. Lopez has a long history of being very independent.

In last Friday’s, Feb. 27, posting, Sen. Linda Lopez Continues Delays on Ethics Bills in NM Senate Rules Committee, Wold blamed Lopez for not bringing forward the ethics bills until four were raised late in the hearing.

Wold hasn’t always been so hard on Lopez. In a May 04, 2005, posting, she wrote: Senator Lopez Sheds Light on Repub Distortions.

Every piece of legislation, every appointee, every memorial, has its supporters and oft times, its detractors. Not every detractor is some “evil” special interest. There may only be a different viewpoint, opposite of a supporter’s or detractor’s own special interest.

Government workers lobby for their respective departments' or add information to the committee’s debate. They include Bureau of Elections Administrator Kelli Fulgenzi who spoke about the effect of campaign reporting requirements on the Secretary of State’s office.

Chief Deputy Attorney General Stuart Bluestone, above left, addresses the committee about legal issues associated with the formation of an ethic commission.

Several ethics bills have cleared the Rules Committee:

SB 94 and 163 sponsored by Mark Boitano, right, and Eric Griego, left, Prohibit Former Legislators as Lobbyists. At the initial hearing Griego indicated Boitano had stronger language and they would later prepare a substitute bill, which was passed out of Rules and is now awaiting a hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee

Sens. Timothy Keller, D, Bernalillo County, Feldman and Berffort Wilson presented bills that would prohibit contractors from making political contributions for up to two years prior to accepting any State work.

Former Sen. H. Diane Snyder, R, Bernalillo County, is now, and has been Executive Director of the American Council of Engineering Companies-New Mexico. Snyder said that part of her duties is governmental relations and that as a citizen legislator, she had to make a living. Her presence was not something that came from her having served, but her service had come from her professional work.

She took offense with the bills tone that contractors, contributors, and lobbyists were somehow bad people.

Snyder said that members of her association were being continually strong armed to make campaign contributions, sponsor public or charitable events; such as hosting seminars, workshops and retreats. They just want to know the rules, that they are written down, so they don't break the law.

SB 261 Retirement Benefit Forfeiture for some Crimes, sponsored by Sen. Sue Wilson Beffort, left, R, Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe and Torrance Counties, was passed out of Rules and is awaiting hearing at the Senate Judiciary Committee.

SB 128 to Require Biannual Campaign Reports, sponsored by Sen. Peter Wirth passed the full Senate, 37-3, with two Senators excused; Cynthia Nava and Mary Jane Garcia, both Democrats from Dona Ana County. Senators Carroll Leavell, R, Eddy and Lea Counties, Richard Martinez, D. Los Alamos, Rio Arriba and Santa Fe Counties, and Michael Sanchez voted against the bill. It is now before the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee.

Four bills, individually sponsored by Senators: Feldman, Wilson Beffort, Bernadette Sanchez and Wirth, addressing the issues of limiting the amounts of political contributions from individuals or groups to candidates, campaigns, and political action committees. Each specifically requires the donor to be named, even if the money goes through a third party. The bills were consolidated into committee substitute 116 and reported out of Rules, today with a do-pass recommendation.

Most, if not all the other pending ethics bills had a first hearing. Those bills, that either have the same name or address the same issues, have been relegated to the committee substitute process and some apparently are coming back for additional debate.

There are four Senators sponsoring individual bills that all address a State Ethics Commission. They are: Sens. Lopez, Feldman, Pete Campos, D, Guadalupe, Mora, San Miguel, Santa Fe, and Torrance Counties, and John Ryan, R, Bernalillo and Sandoval Counties.

There are some major differences amongst these proposals, especially in the number and manner of selection for commissioners. There is also wide latitude in just how broad an ethics commission’s reach should be. Some argue it should be limited to the elected members of the three branches of government: the executive, legislative and judicial. Others propose that it apply down to County Commissioners, while others believe it should be all encompassing; including all public employees and any contractors who are working on government projects. There was a discussion that might lead to the term of art, “and all political sub-divisions.”

Executive Director and General Counsel for the New Mexico Judicial Standards Commission Jim Noel, above, pointed out that the legislature is barred form creating an ethics commission for judges. The State Constitution’s Article VI, Judicial Department, Section 32, Judicial standards commission, was adopted by a voter approved amendment November 7, 1967, and updated several times. If the legislature wants to include judges in a new process, they must do so by amending the Constitution.

SB 693 Prohibiting Certain Contributions and Solicitations of Contributions by Business Entities and Lobbyists and the Principals of State Contractors sponsored by Sen. Eric Griego, above left, with Common Causes' Allen is still pending.

MacQuigg has taken his own view of the back and forth of the bureaucratic political gamesmanship over the problem of a window with its overpowering sunlight streaming through it into the Rules Committee room.

It wasn't until about mid way through the third day of our webcasting efforts that Rules Committee Analyst Matt Baca, left, inquired about the window blinds' adjustment. He fixed the the window.

MacQuigg also has a comment about how hard it is to get up at 4:30 am to catch the 5:30 RailRunner train to be set up for the scheduled 8:00 committee meeting.

Though he may have closed his eyes momentarily, I sat on the floor, at the back of the room, during a non-ethics related debate and took a quick nap. I opened my eyes and saw Daniel Ivey-Soto, above, who is lobbying for County Clerks on election issues, pointing his cellular phone’s camera in my direction. He has been kind enough not to put it on the internet.

As I see it, casting light on the legislative process is a good thing, but competing with the bright sunlight can cause problems photographically. This is Sen. Cravens, left, talks on his cellular phone silhouetted before the committee room's window.

Lopez has the power to move these bills forward, but my sense is she rather get good legislation rather than hurried junk. There is adequate time to accomplish the passing of meaningful ethics reform.

Time to go?

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

This is University of New Mexico President David Schmidly being given a time notice while he spoke for five minutes during the Faculty Senate meeting in Popejoy Hall.

Schmidly wasn’t speaking to a happy crowd. About 500 faculty members attended the meeting and there were approximately 250 staff, students and members of the public in the balcony. The group had red cards for “hand voting” and all the procedural motions seemed to be passed unanimously. The mood was determined.

The serious voting was done by ballot and included a call for an audit of selected areas of the University budget where cuts have been made to academic programs.

471 votes for the audit
18 votes against
8 abstentions
497 Total votes

Motion on the statement of purpose for the University:

463 votes for the statement
23 votes against
12 abstentions
498 Total votes

In what was termed a “crisis of confidence regarding administrative decision-making by President of Regents, UNM President and UNM Vice-President for Finance & Administration,” Regents President Jamie Koch, Schmidly, and Executive Vice President David Harris faced a vote of no confidence. Harris was Acting President in 2006. Koch’s six-year term as regent has expired and Gov. Bill Richardson has re submitted his name for a second term.

482 votes for no confidence in Regents President Jamie Koch
7 votes against
3 abstentions
492 Total votes

438 votes for no confidence in Executive Vice President David Harris
24 votes against
26 abstentions
488 Total votes

329 votes for no confidence in President David Schmidly
106 votes against
55 abstentions
487 Total votes

So what’s wrong with this picture?

I haven’t seen this much local press coverage since the presidential election. The University’s press relations went out of their way to control the coverage by limiting access to photo opportunities of the three top administrators. It was a ham-fisted effort.

Schmidly has been at UNM 20-months, his salary is $587,000. He is perceived as having a top-heavy administration of politically connected appointees with bloated salaries. Schmidly won’t take a cut in pay.


This is Michael Collins, he is a personal advisor for public and press relations, who is paid $10,000 a month by contract. He is seen here with Director of Communications Susan McKinsey at a 2007 press conference.

Schmidly's son was given a position at a high salary. However, the son never started the job when news coverage applied strong pressure.

Schmidly is perceived as not listening or engaging with stake holders before making important decisions.

The votes are non-binding; an expression of the faculty.

My Take

The faculty's expression should not be taken lightly, nor was it. There were several people in the room representing various interests, including Danny Hernandez, aid to State Senator Linda Lopez who chairs the Senate Rules committee that will decide on the reappointment of Koch as a regent.

State Democratic Party Chairman Brian Colón was in attendance, with his Blackberry in use much of the time. Koch was a Party chair previously and the political implications of this issue are large.

I’ve been taking classes off and on since 1977, with two serious time frames: 1986 – 1990 and 2001 to the present. In those times I have not sensed the urgency that is currently displayed.

Schmidly and crew have seriously upset the institution. Schmidly’s sense of doing good, is not supported by the faculty. It might be time for a new direction.

Earlier Spring

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Last year I showed you this blooming tree at the corner of Buena Vista and Central. I noted that it seemed to have blossomed early.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

Last year I posted on March 11, and the tree was just budding.

Here it is Feb. 25, and the tree is several days into blossoming.

That's two weeks earlier.

We’ve had a very mild winter and spring is trying to arrive.

Notice the allergies? You’re lucky if you don’t.

"Grape Juice," Allen Welch

This is Allen Welch, known as "Buddy" to his family and friends, but was also known as “Grape Juice” to Albuquerque police officers that worked with him when he was a traffic officer.

Welch passed away of an apparent heart attack January 27, 2009, according to his brother in law, Kenny Santillanes, also a retired APD officer. Welch was 65.

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

I first met Welch in 1970. He was riding motors at the time. I took this picture at a fatal motorcycle accident he was investigating. He was a short man and reminded some of the character the Robert Blake played in the movie of a few years later, “Electra-Glide in Blue.”

Welch was friendly and a good cop. I also covered him when he made traffic stop that aptly illustrated a problem of the time; tension between police and local Hispanic political activists known by the black berets they wore.

He will be missed.

Lights, Camera, Action or Inaction

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

I love a good conspiracy. Not one of those where people sit around and conjure up stories about how events that are difficult to fathom, were actually complicated and massive plots or cover-ups, perpetrated on unwitting citizens by secret government cabals. Nor do I mean the kind found in the first definition of the word to conspire; to do something illegal.

No. What I’m talking about is a group of people who actually sit around, over a cup of coffee, talking and listening to each other’s ideas, and coming up with a collective way to make substantial governmental change.

The secondary meaning of the word conspiracy is working together or plotting to cause a desired result or change to the detriment of another.

One such group in town is actually called, “ConspiracyBrews,” named, tongue in cheek, more for the coffee than any conspiracy. The detriment this group seeks, is towards closed and secret governmental power.

ConspiracyBrews is the brainchild of three-term New Mexico State Representative Janice Arnold-Jones, a Republican from Albuquerque’s Northeast Heights District 24, Bernalillo County.

In the past two election cycles Arnold-Jones, here, with her husband, John, at the 2007 opening of the Legislature, has faced no opposition, in either the primary or general elections.

As a matter of complete disclosure, a little more than two years ago I was introduced to Arnold-Jones by Harold Morgan, right, editor of Capitol Report New Mexico, who was then helping her campaign communications efforts.

I aided her by making a campaign photograph. Since then, I have responded to her queries. She is a faithful reader of this blog.

About ten months ago, Arnold-Jones realized that she had no opponent for her legislative seat, but didn’t want the election to pass without the opportunity to campaign. I suggested that she run as if she had an opponent: to walk her district, meet with her constituents one-on-one, and to hold office hours, open to anyone. She had held a “community discussion on ethics,” on Dec. 6, 2007, that was deemed successful. Why not do more?

Without opposition, she was free to raise issues of public concern that might otherwise be politically sensitive in heated contested races. I promised I would attend her open meetings and would not allow them to get dull.

That was the start. Arnold-Jones gathered her small, but dedicated group of campaign volunteers and her district’s Party members and others she had met along the way, inviting them to coffee at Cup O Joe’s on Saturday mornings.

The weekly meetings started small, but the conversations were lively. The group was encouraged to bring a friend under each arm and the numbers slowly grew.

The number attending fluctuates each week, but averages about 30; there are around 15 attendees who regularly participate. All are welcome, party doesn’t matter, neither does residency, you don’t have to live in the Representative’s district to be welcomed.

The group has Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and Libertarians. Within those larger groups, we find the complete political spectrum. When was the last time you heard the theories of the John Birch Society espoused? We’ve even got them.

The group brings together a divergent mix; here regular Mike Meyer, left, who announced his intention to run for the State Republican Party Chairmanship at the meetings, speaks with occasional visitor Harvey Yates, Jr., on Dec. 27, 2008, about his possibly entering the race. Yates would enter and beat Meyer, John Padovan, right, is another occasional visitor, and Dr. Allen McCulloch, from Farmington who has not attended, though he was invited.

Public Regulation Commissioner Jason Marks, a Democrat, above, visited recently and spoke about attempts for his body to be more open through technology.

Former Secretary of State’s elections chief Daniel Ivey-Soto, right, a Democrat, attends and contributes, especially on poll, election and ballot issues.

So what’s wrong with this picture?

In order to better understand, I present a roster of some of our group.

In no way do I mean to slight anybody who attends, by not mentioning them, because even the quiet ones add to the group dynamic.

I am going to limit this discussion to a group responsible for last couple of week’s number one legislative story; the use of a webcam by Arnold-Jones to show workings of the House Taxation and Revenue and the House Rules and Order of Business Committees.

The video coverage I present in this posting is not gavel to gavel, but an edited version of a selection of the full comments of members of the House Rules committee. I present the video this way to demonstrate that there are ways of presenting information without having the entire debate or being limited only to a television news sound bite.

This is Ched MacQuigg, above, covering the House rules committee for the blog spot he writes, Diogenes' Six. I provide pictures for MacQuigg's site.

You’ll remember Diogenes from your Greek mythology. He was considered one of the great Greek Cynic philosophers. He lived naked in a rain barrel. Diogenes, it is told, wandered Athens, during the day, with a lantern seeking a human being, others say he sought an honest man. MacQuigg’s site pays homage to Diogenes and “Six” indicates guarding the philosopher’s back, a fighter pilots reference to location based on the face of an analogue clock.

MacQuigg’s main focus is on his former employer, the Albuquerque Public Schools.


He has been most active in striving to hold the current Superintendent Winston Brooks, APS Board and top administrators accountable to ethical standards.

MacQuigg had a career as an APS shop teacher.

He also was an original member of Albuquerque educators who participated in a Character Counts, "train the trainers" seminar put on by the Josephson Institute's Center of California.

“It was a life altering event,” MacQuigg said. He has inculcated the philosophy of Character Counts and became an ethics advocate.

He demands adults at APS live to the same standards that students are being taught.

Over time, the APS Board of Education has distanced itself from the fundamental philosophical underpinnings and refuses to hold themselves to the ethical standards identified by Character Counts.

MacQuigg challenged his school’s leadership for not enforcing rules against students.

He was disciplined and wrongly terminated. APS reinstated him, but about four months later he left APS when they bought out his retirement.

Two years ago, MacQuigg ran for the School Board but lost to current member Martin Esquivel.

He takes every opportunity to call for ethical conduct and has used a variety of techniques to attempt to engage the Board in a civil conversation.

"The Board was refusing to talk about the elephant in the room," MacQuigg said, so he wore a homemade mask in silent protest.

He has been arrested by APS police, though not charged, more than a handful of times, for raising questions that either an administrator, board member or bureaucrat, who gave the police the high sign after deeming his comments off limits.

APS Board meetings are recorded and broadcast on the educational cable access channel. MacQuigg has had problems reaching the wider audience as technical audio gremlins have plagued him, in particular, when he speaks.

MacQuigg is on the right path; he just doesn’t have much of a public following.

Last summer before the Special Session of the Legislature, a ConspiracyBrews discussion was contemplating ways to get the public’s interest in the issues facing the state. If you recall, a tax rebate was the key issue, with Gov. Bill Richardson wanting to give money back to every taxpayer.

There was a concern that the idea was not very wise, as gas and oil revenues were very high, but there was an uncertainty about them staying at record rates.

MacQuigg suggested that thousands of angry citizens armed with torches and pitchforks storm the steps of the Capitol demanding openness and accountability. I suggested updated technology; video cameras throughout the galleries, edited together and posted on the Internet. There was an interest; though nothing was accomplished during the special session, an even newer technology emerged; webcasting.

A team of assistants helped Arnold-Jones acquaint herself with the Internet based technology.

Arnold-Jones is practicing operating the webcam during a ConspiracyBrews gathering Jan. 24, with the assistance of Charlie Christmann, running his webcam while streaming through a laptop computer. Christmann’s website is CivicPlaza.Net, the catch phrase, “Taking Back Our Country One Politician at a Time,” hosts and archives both the ConspiracyBrews meetings starting Jan 16. and the legislative committees.

Howard DeLaCruz-Bancroft, in the background operates his webcam at the Jan. 24, Saturday morning office hours meeting, ConspiracyBrews gathering. Arnold-Jones is being interviewed on her cellular phone about her planned webcasting of State Legislature activities. The interview was with radio talk show "Speaking Freely" hosted by Jim Scarantino and featuring Paul Gessing, last Sat. at 9 a.m. on JOY AM 1550, Albuquerque.

DeLaCruz-Bancroft opened a second website, NMGOV.TV to host Arnold-Jones’ webcasting efforts. The second site is a non-partisan hosting location.


New Mexico’s State Legislature is one of only three States that do not provide either audio or video coverage of their sessions, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. The three are: Arkansas, West Virginia, and New Mexico.

Yet the University of New Mexico owned, KUNM FM 89.9. Radio started to webcast House and Senate floor sessions on their website.

A commercial venture, New Mexico Legislative Report, has also posted a free link to both the House and Senate audio. This service had been available by subscription.

Others argue that the number of states not webcasting or televising legislative sessions is higher. Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network’s website indicates that, as many as nine states do not meet their definition of webcasting or televising. They are: Arkansas, Delaware, Hawaii, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and West Virginia.

“New Mexico is one of only six states that doesn't webcast legislative proceedings,” The New Mexican’s Political Reporter Steve Terrell wrote, January 19, in his article headlined, “Budget crunch delays session webcasting: New Mexico one of six states without service.”

Sen. Mark Boitano, R, Bernalillo County, left, introduced Senate Memorial 45 in February 2008. The Memorial reinforced a 2005 piece of legislation instructing the Senate to start webcasting, but was never implemented.

Boitano’s Memorial stated:

…the New Mexico legislative council, at its January 14, 2008 meeting, declined to direct staff to issue a request for proposals to solicit bids so that webcasting could begin…

…legislative council service be requested to proceed as expeditiously as possible with the necessary arrangements and contracts to ensure that the proceedings of the senate will be streamed on the internet beginning in 2009,

The Senate’s roll call vote in February 2008, was 27-13.

The Senate’s Committees Committee voted to delay implementation, citing the budget crunch. Those voting in the committee included the Senate’s Democratic leadership: President Pro Tem Tim Jennings, Chavez, County, below center, and Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, below left, Valencia County. Other Democrats voting against the cameras were Senators: Phil Griego, Los Alamos, Mora, Sandoval, San Miguel, Santa Fe, and Taos Counties, Linda Lopez, Bernalillo County, Mary Kay Papen, Dona Ana County, and John Sapien, Sandoval County.

Minority Leader Stuart Ingle, right, Chaves, Curry, De Baca, and Roosevelt Counties was joined by fellow Republican Senators: Vernon Asbill, Eddy and Otero Counties, Gay Kernan, Chaves, Curry, Eddy, Lea, and Roosevelt Counties, and Carroll Leavell, Eddy and Lea Counties, in opposing the cameras.

Terrell, in his blog, Roundhouse Roundup, reported seeing a Capitol maintenance worker removing the cameras from the Senate chambers on Jan. 13, only a week before the opening of the regular 60-day session.

The physical removal of the cameras from the walls and the accompanying unstated message it sent, that there would be no open coverage; caused the ConspiracyBrews participants to focus interest on providing an alternative source of information to the citizens of the state.

Arnold-Jones, with House Minority Leader Tom Taylor, R, San Juan County, at an off session Dec. 18, 2008, Legislative meeting, determined that she would step into the breach and provide streaming video from the legislature. She carefully selected how she would proceed; reading the rules and determining the best course of action. She decided she would stream only the committee meetings of which she is a member.

Stepping forward posed certain risks and likely criticism. To avoid possible recrimination, I recommended preemptively establishing internal rules for operating the camera.

Arnold-Jones asked me to wordsmith a statement to be used on the website accompanying the webcast. Using the 30-year old Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network as a model, and based on my experiences with the Bernalillo County/City of Albuquerque’s government access cable channel GOV-TV 16, I drafted a statement.

This web cast is provided to my constituents to raise public awareness and help educate citizens on the Legislature’s activity.

Web castings protocol is simple:

It is nonpartisan,
The picture follows sound, meaning the legislator or witness viewed is the person recognized by committee chair or the Speaker of the House.

Nothing shown or recorded on the web cast will be used for political purposes or campaign.

At the first Tax and Revenue Committee meeting Monday Jan. 26, Arnold-Jones set up her high tech equivalent of a “Dixie cup and a string,” communications device and streamed a live session of the Legislative committee.

Her effort was a hit with some, especially the media and most bloggers.

However, Tax and Revenue Committee Chairman Rep. Ed Sandoval, D, Bernalillo, below right, asked Arnold-Jones twice to shut off her webcam. Sandoval complained that she didn’t ask his permission.

Arnold-Jones stood her ground. Speaker of the House Ben Lujan, D, Santa Fe County, below left, a member of Tax and Revenue, feigned surprise and said he was offended by Arnold-Jones not having had the courtesy of informing him of her plan to stream.

The next day, in a lightening strike response to the webcam, the House Rules and Order of Business Committee, chaired by Rep. Nick L. Salazar, D, Mora, Rio Arriba, San Miguel, Santa Fe and Taos Counties, above sitting to the right of Luján, held it’s first meeting of the session with two agenda items: allowing bolo ties as neckwear for male members on the House floor, and establishing a rule on webcasting.

House rule 2 was cosponsored by the House leadership; House Majority Leader Ken Martinez, left, Cibola, McKinley and San Juan Counties and House Minority Leader Taylor.

The existing House rule reads:

9-5-7
Photography, video or audio recording or transmission of committee proceedings may be allowed with the permission of the chair.

The rule would further amend existing rule 9-10:

The principal duties of the chairman of a committee are:
(b) to preside over meetings of the committee, maintain order and decide all questions of order subject to appeal to a majority of the appointed committee;

New language would be added to subsection b:

...and to ensure that the decorum of the committee is preserved while maximizing the public's ability to observe, report on and participate in a meeting;

There was a long discussion that included the now famous statement by Rep. Ray Begaye, D, San Juan County, where he was concerned that he might be caught sleeping and the video could be used for political purposes against him.

Begaye started with a privacy question, whether a legislator has a privacy interest while fulfilling his legislative duties. He worried allowed about the potential of video being available for sale, redistribution and ultimately used for political mischief by opponents. He said his was an after the fact concern.

Bloggers, print media and KRQE, in particular seized on Begaye’s sitting back in his seat and acting as if he were sleeping to make his point.

Here is Begaye’s entire comment:

"If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right the first time," Rep. Elias Barela, D, Valencia County, said. "I understand the frustration with some members, that we don't have this (webcasting), but just look at the havoc, if one member, of one party, with one ax to grind. And I'm not in any way insinuating that this particular member has that (pointing to Arnold-Jones, standing in the back of the room)." "But, what you're opening up is is something that could be used as a partisan tool."

"Politics is a very open forum," Rep. John Heaton, above left, D, Eddy County, said, "and I think that by being here we have consented to whatever scrutiny anybody wants to apply to us."

"As of Jan. 31, the Albuquerque Journal has discontinued the contracts," Rep. Anna Crook, R, Curry County, said of the suspension of newspaper delivery to the Eastside of the state. "So here we are out here, we can't get the news on satellite, we can't get the newspaper delivery and all. So this is a convince. It's something my constituents, and they have brought this to me. We don't live in Texas."

"We in New Mexico, I, my personal perception, we always have this problem of always with trying to reinvent the wheel," Kathy McCoy, R, Bernalillo, Sandoval and Santa Fe Counties, said."

"Who would actually be doing the webcasting, would there be competition," Rep. Debbie Rodella, Rio Arriba, Sandoval and Taos Counties, asked? "Perhaps an independent third party, or whether it be the council service or somebody else that would take ownership of the webcasting and we wouldn't find ourselves on YouTube this afternoon or tomorrow," she said.

Rep. Keith Gardner, R, Chaves, Eddy, Lea and Roosevelt Counties, engaged Minority Leader Martinez in a discussion about a free press. You will find the debate further down in this posting.

Rep. Danice Picraux, D, Bernalillo County, asked if other states had established rules or guidelines to limit times for speakers in the presence of cameras to ensure decorum.

"I think there should be some mandatory language to the proposed rule which does recognize the discretion of the chairs," Vice Chairman Rep. Joseph Cervantes, D, Dona Ana County, said.

"I'm specifically not against wbecasting," Speaker Luján said.

Chairman Salazar accepted a motion to form a subcommittee to investigate the use of webcasting House activities.

Taylor made a motion, which was seconded by McCoy. He asked that the rule change be adopted in the interim until the sub committee 's report is returned. Adopting the rule would have given clear protection to Arnold-Jones' coverage. Salazar ruled the motion out of order. From a parliamentary stand point there is nothing improper about the motion. The chair chose to rule it out of order because it would officially impose a duty on him to make the previous motion effective.

McCoy, right, and Gardner asked for the subcommittee to return with their report on a date certain. Speaker Luján said he would make the appointments expeditiously.

Based on a fiscal impact report prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee, there is no cost associated with adding the words to the rule.

Legislative Council Service Director Paula Tackett and Assistant Director for Legislative Affairs, John Yaeger, above center conferring with the rule's co-sponsors, Martinez, left and Taylor, right, were instructed to research what other states were doing and to propose a plan for New Mexico.

Arnold-Jones described her disappointment with the delay to members of the press, including KRQE's Kaitlin McCarthy, left.

Speaker Luján appointed a House rules subcommittee, with three Democrats and three Republican.


The Democrats, above, are: House Majority Leader Martinez; Reps. Begaye and Debbie Rodella, Rio Arriba, Sandoval and Taos Counties. The Republican subcommittee members, below, are: Reps. Richard Berry, Bernalillo County; Larry Larrañaga, Bernalillo County; and McCoy.

During this debate, several things have happened beyond the legislative control. In addition to KUNM FM’s audio webcasting, the subscription service, New Mexico Legislative Reports, which acts as the legislative record detailing actions and votes from the floor of both chambers is offering audio webstream to its subscribers and is looking into also providing a video link.


Analysis

The C-SPAN Model

Cable-Satellite Public Affairs Network,housed at the end of this block, is a product of the nations cable operators has been broadcasting the direct coverage provided by the U.S. House of Representatives since 1979 and the Senate in 1986.

Broadcast Coverage of Congress,” are found under, “Rule V, Clause 1, Broadcasting the House.” The rule specifically outlines procedures to provide “complete and unedited audio and visual broadcasting and recording of the proceedings of the House.”

Though Congress has an exclusive agreement with C-SPAN to air the proceedings in the chambers of the House of Representatives and the Senate, nothing prohibits a State from providing coverage of its events directly through its own website, bypassing commercial outlets.

C-SPAN also does it’s own programming which it airs when not showing congressional floor activities.

When you watch C-SPAN and see a committee meeting, White House Press conference, lecture, speeches, studio shows with analysis, call ins, or interviews, with the exception of the of the floor coverage; that material is usually produced by C-SPAN and subject to their own copyright.

C-SPAN sends out crews, like the one above, to cover a 1989 Ethics in Government conference session moderated by Michael Josephson of the Josephson Institute Center. The same Josephson that MacQuigg dealt with for Character Counts.

The crew used two cameras to record the event for later playback.

In the same Washington hotel, the same day, the Democratic Leadership Conference was holding a luncheon where Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives Richard Gephardt, of Mo., above, was giving a speech. C-SPAN also had a two-camera crew covering that event. The camera to the left of Gephardt belongs to C-SPAN; the other is on the press riser, below to the right.

In 30 years, most, if not all the concerns, such as Begaye’s fear, of being caught napping, has been addressed. C-SPAN does not show individual Representatives or Senators who are not addressing their respective bodies.

House rules dictate members behavior in using floor video. The most significant rules are:

c) Coverage made available under this clause, including any recording thereof--
may not be used for any political purpose;
may not be used in any commercial advertisement; and
may not be broadcast with commercial sponsorship except as part of a bona fide news program or public affairs documentary program.

In drafting the three rules: non partisan, picture follows sound, and not for political or campaign use, there is an exception to the rule two.

If you’re old enough to remember streaking, it took ABC’s Wide World of Sports and others several years to figure out that naked men running around sporting event grounds was not part of the sport. Sports television quit showing them; they were not news. Neither are hecklers. So the exception is, if a fight breaks out on the floor, like a Tiwanese debate, where their legislative body has been known to erupt in fisticuffs; then the events should be shown. It is a spur of the moment call that must judiciously be made by the technician who is sufficiently aware and informed to make an appropriate editorial decision

There is a distinction between coverage provided by the government and coverage by a free press. The government’s rules may be applied to their own technicians. However, the First Amendment prohibits government from making and enforcing such rules against a free press.

Rep. Gardner makes his comment and engages Rep. Martinez in a discussion of press rights under the proposed rule. This was the best debate of the day.

Martinez attempts to determine what the press is. He gives an example where he tries to determine that the press is independent. Listen to his story of challenging a person who was documenting a hearing and advocating at the same time.

I asked a person not to videotape, because I asked him, was he here as the press or was he here as an advocate. He said he was the press, then sat down in this chair to argue. I said, now I have a question, are you here to advocate for the bill or here to record it, I said you kind of have to make a decision, because it seems to me that an independent press person would be taking an advocacy position and he said something to the effect, I guess your right and he didn’t say anything and he moved back to videotape again.

Martinez, nor anyone else in government, has the authority to determine who the press is or how they operate. The First Amendment is a prohibition on government. The State’s right is even broader; a person is free to speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects. Inherent in the word publish, is the ability to report. Reporting is done through observation, using the five senses and may be augmented by technological devices, like recorders and cameras of all types.

Martinez, using a perverse logic that a person recording a committee meeting had to be the independent press, successfully challenged the man. In his own belief, Martinez had intimidated, bullied or convinced the man that he could not fulfill a dual role.

Note:

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion; or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and petition the Government for redress of grievances.

The State of New Mexico’ Constitutional Bill of Right is equally clear:

Sec. 17. Freedom of speech and press; libel.

Every person may freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right; and no law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press. In all criminal prosecutions for libels, the truth may be given in evidence to the jury; and if it shall appear to the jury that the matter charged as libelous is true and was published with good motives and for justifiable ends, the party shall be acquitted.

Martinez, has no problem sitting at the witness table with three digital recorders belonging to members of the press in front of him while advocating his rule change before his own committee. Why? Because he also, as a person, as well as a legislator, has the same right to freely speak, write and publish his sentiments on all subjects. It doesn’t matter where you sit or stand.

When Martinez intimidated the advocate he violate four of the six enumerated First Amendment rights: speech, press, assembly or association, and to petition government for redress of a grievance.

There are more publications and communications about issues that attract the genera