Common Cause - Holding Power ResponsibleCommon Cause - Holding Power Responsible

Topics
Our Issues
Money in Politics
Election Reform
Media and Democracy
Ethics in Government
Government Accountability
Press Center
Research Center
Register to Vote

Sign Up and join the Community - click here

Step One in Cleaning Up New Mexico

Hi Folks.  This is Matt from Common Cause New Mexico .  As is the case in Washington, the scandal drum beats on here in New Mexico.  Recently, former New Mexico State Treasurer Robert Vigil was convicted of attempted extortion after a highly publicized federal trial.  The trial and conviction exposed New Mexico's weak ethics and campaign finance laws.  

For the past several months, a task force assembled by Governor Bill Richardson has been developing recommendations for improving the state's ethics and campaign finance laws.  Last week, the task force released its findings and recommendations to Governor Richardson.  The recommendations include limits on gifts and campaign contributions, and an expansion of New Mexico's public financing laws.  

More about the specific recommendations after the jump.      

The task force recommended:

-Establish a system to expand public financing of campaigns to all statewide offices and contested judicial races.

-Make it illegal for a legislator to use campaign funds to pay for anything but campaigning.  Lawmakers would be allowed to seek reimbursement of up to $10,000 a year for expenses such as staff and office space.

-Limit campaign contributions to statewide candidates to $2,100, with a $1,050 cap for district candidates.  Cash contributions would be limited to $100.  Also, campaign finance reports would become more detailed.

-Legislators and other public officials would have to report any gift valued at more than $100.  They would be prohibited from accepting gifts valued at more than $100 during a legislative session or, during the rest of the year, any gift valued at more than $250.  Lobbyists, their employers and government contractors would not be allowed to give more than $1,000 in gifts a year to any public official.

-An ethics commission with fulltime staff and subpoena power.

-State treasurer and state auditor would become appointed offices.  The governor would appoint the treasurer, while the auditor would be appointed by an "independent commission."  There would be minimum professional requirements for the two posts.


Tags: ethics, New Mexico, public financing (all tags)


Display:

Task force has it right

I love it when an independment task force tells it like it is. It is all too common for elected officials or partisans to shrug their shoulders when confronted by incidents of impropriety or out-and-out corruption (Abramoff comes to mind). They would have us believe that these type of things are unfortunate and unusual incidents. Well, none other than Bob Ney said it best in his guilty plea: "I allowed myself to get too comfortable with the way things have been done in Washington D.C. for too long."

The secret's out. Everyone sees that something needs to be done with the way campaigns are financed.

Go, fight, win, New Mexico.

by Andy Sauer on Sat Oct 14, 2006 at 09:30:56 AM EST


Civil rights case being ignored

This civil rights case for some reason is getting little attention from the media, Im sure Common Cause will take up the fight to defend these white voters who are being discriminated against.

Taken from the New York Times, U.S. Politics section.

MACON, Miss., Oct. 5(Published Oct. 11) -- The Justice Department has chosen this no-stoplight, courthouse town buried in the eastern Mississippi prairie for an unusual civil rights test: the first federal lawsuit under the Voting Rights Act accusing blacks of suppressing the rights of whites.

Roderick Walker, county prosecutor, says the lawsuit is about "fair play."
The action represents a sharp shift, and it has raised eyebrows outside the state. The government is charging blacks with voting fraud in a state whose violent rejection of blacks' right to vote, over generations, helped give birth to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Yet within Mississippi the case has provoked knowing nods rather than cries of outrage, even among liberal Democrats.

The Justice Department's main focus is Ike Brown, a local power broker whose imaginative electoral tactics have for 20 years caused whisperings from here to the state capital in Jackson, 100 miles to the southwest. Mr. Brown, tall, thin, a twice-convicted felon, the chairman of the Noxubee County Democratic Executive Committee and its undisputed political boss, is accused by the federal government of orchestrating -- with the help of others -- "relentless voting-related racial discrimination" against whites, whom blacks outnumber by more than 3 to 1 in the county.

His goal, according to the government: keeping black politicians -- ones supported by Mr. Brown, that is -- in office.

To do that, the department says, he and his allies devised a watertight system for controlling the all-determining Democratic primary, much as segregationists did decades ago.

Mr. Brown is accused in the lawsuit and in supporting documents of paying and organizing notaries, some of whom illegally marked absentee ballots or influenced how the ballots were voted; of publishing a list of voters, all white, accompanied by a warning that they would be challenged at the polls; of importing black voters into the county; and of altering racial percentages in districts by manipulating the registration rolls.

To run against the county prosecutor -- one of two white officeholders in Noxubee -- Mr. Brown brought in a black lawyer from outside the county, according to the supporting documents, who never even bothered to turn on the gas or electricity at his rented apartment. That candidate was disqualified.Whites, who make up just under 30 percent of the population here, are circumspect when discussing Mr. Brown, though he remains a hero to many blacks. When he drove off to federal prison to serve a sentence for tax fraud in 1995, he received a grand farewell from his political supporters and friends, including local elected officials; whites, on the other hand, for years have seen him as a kind of occult force in determining the affairs of the county.

Still, many whites said privately they welcomed the Justice Department's lawsuit, which is scheduled for trial early next year.

"In my opinion, it puts the focus on fair play," said Roderick Walker, the county prosecutor Mr. Brown tried to oust, in 2003. "They were doing something wrong."

Up and down South Jefferson Street, though, in the old brick commercial district, the white merchants refused to be quoted, for fear of alienating black customers. "There's a lot of voting irregularities, but that's all I'm going to say," one woman said, ending the conversation abruptly.

The Justice Department's voting rights expert is less reserved. "Virtually every election provides a multitude of examples of these illegal activities organized by Ike Brown and other defendants, and those who act in concert with them," the expert, Theodore S. Arrington, chairman of the political science department at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, wrote in a report filed with the court.

Mr. Brown is coolly dismissive of the case against him. He has no office at the white-columned Noxubee County Courthouse, but that is where he casually greets visitors, in a chair near the entrance. A loquacious man, he both minimizes his own role and portrays himself as a central target. Far from being the vital orchestrator portrayed by the government, "when I was in Maxwell prison in '95 and '96, the show went right on," he said.

There are so few whites in the county, Mr. Brown suggests, that the tactics he is accused of are unnecessary to keep blacks in office.

"They can't win anyway unless we choose to vote for them," he said with a smile. "If I was doing something wrong -- that's like closing the barn door when the horse is already gone."

He sees the lawsuit against him as merely the embittered reaction of whites who feel disenfranchised, and he scoffs at a consent decree signed last year in which county officials agreed not to harass or intimidate white candidates or voters, manipulate absentee ballots, or let poll workers coach voters, among other things. "I wouldn't sign my name," Mr. Brown said.

But the Justice Department is pressing ahead with its suit, and wants to force Mr. Brown to agree to the same cease-and-desist conditions as his fellow county officials.

The state's Democratic establishment has hardly rallied around Mr. Brown; privately some Democrats here express disdain for his tactics. Instead, he is being defended by a maverick Republican lawyer who sees the suit as an example of undue interference in the affairs of a political party.

"To do what they want to do, they would virtually have to take over the Democratic Party," said the lawyer, Wilbur Colom, adding that Mr. Brown's notoriety had made him the focus of the investigation. "I believe they were under so much pressure because of Ike's very sophisticated election operation. He is a Karl Rove genius on the Noxubee County level."

In Jackson, though, a leading light in Mr. Brown's own party, Mississippi Secretary of State Eric Clark, a longtime moderate in state politics, refused to endorse him.

"Anybody who tries to prevent people from voting is breaking the law," Mr. Clark said. "I certainly suspect some of that has been going on."

Back in Macon, in the shadow of the courthouse green's standard-issue Confederate monument, Mr. Brown spoke of history: "They had their way all the time. They no longer have their way. That's what it's all about." The case is "all about politics," he said, "all about them trying to keep me from picking the lock."

But Mr. Walker, the county prosecutor, insisted the past had nothing to do with the case against Mr. Brown. "I wouldn't sit here and pretend black people haven't been mistreated," he said. "I hate what happened in the past. But I can't do anything about it."

by MusicofIndia on Sun Oct 15, 2006 at 01:14:13 AM EST


Civil rights case being ignored

It does appear that when Caucasians are the victims of voter intimidation and when voter fraud is carried out by blacks,the mainstream media does not say a whole lot. As of the 17th of October, Common Cause has made no mention of these potential civil right violations, potential voter fraud and racism. Although accusations of liberal-bias against Common Cause are quite common, even I am surprised that a case involving race and voting gets no attention on this blog. I hope the race of the victims involved in this case, is not the reason it is receiving no attention on this blog.  

by OldPuebloKid on Tue Oct 17, 2006 at 11:21:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Civil rights case being ignored

This groundbreaking lawsuit, as far as news coverage is concerned, is getting nil.  Race is the main reason for this lack of exposure. Anyone who watches CNN,NBC etc., is well aware of the overwhelming liberal one-sidedness of the news. Liberals are mentally unable to recognize that racism exists against people of European descent. Even white liberals, aka "white Uncle Toms" are quick to attack their own race but when whites are the victims of hate themselves, these white liberals act like race has nothing to with it. I remember another groundbreaking civil rights lawsuit in New Jersey called: Piscataway School Board v. Taxman here is the information of this civil rights case:

Piscataway School Board v. Taxman, 91 F.3d 1547 (3d Cir. 1996) was a racial discrimination case begun in 1989. The school board of Piscataway, New Jersey needed to eliminate a teaching position from a high school's Business Education department. Under New Jersey state law, tenured teachers have to be laid off in reverse order of seniority. The newest tenured teachers, Sharon Taxman and Debra Williams, European-American and African-American respectively, had started working at the school on the same day. In the interest of maintaining racial diversity (Williams was the only black teacher in the department,although blacks were well represented in other depts and 50% of the students were minorities), the school board voted to lay off Taxman, even though she had a master's degree and Williams only had a bachelor's degree. Taxman complained to the EEOC, saying that the board had violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

The Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Taxman. The school board appealed to the United States Supreme Court and a hearing was scheduled for January 1998, but racial preference groups, fearing that the case could lead to the prohibition of affirmative action(and equality for all people), provided money for the board to settle the case out of court, so the case was never heard.

by MusicofIndia on Wed Oct 18, 2006 at 03:37:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account just by filling out the form below. It's quick and free.


contact us | volunteer/intern programs | employment opportunities | site map | privacy policy