Green Job Profile: Gerald King

Tracy Dingmann — Sat, 05 Jul 2008 13:33:46 MDT

Gerald King can't wait for the day when green jobs become plentiful all over Albuquerque. The New York native says he's tired of working dirty, low-paying jobs that don't benefit the environment.

King says he feels like he's worked every one of those jobs, but confesses that his "bottom rung" was his stint at a fast-food restaurant, serving up "unhealthy, jacked-up food."

Indeed, fast food restaurants, which serve heavily-processed starches, sugars and meat from far-flung sources, pay the lowest and have the highest carbon footprint of any food sources around.

King, who is 32, said he learned about green jobs recently while attending classes at the Central New Mexico Community College, or CNM. Specifically, he read about the green jobs initiative spearheaded by New Mexico Youth Organized, a piece of proposed city legislation that would provide training for those seeking green jobs and incentives to businesses who offer them.

King volunteered with NMYO to get the word out about green jobs and says he hopes to be one of the many people who will benefit if the City Council passes the initiative. Four city councilors introduced the measure to the entire body in May, and it will be taken up again in August.

Right now King works part-time at various jobs, including sometimes working as an extra on movies shot in New Mexico.

But King says he would love to take a permanent, full-time position in recycling work or possibly bike repair - a clean job that benefits and enhances the environment, without harming it. He says he would welcome the opportunity to get training for his new job.

"I mean, you're not necessarily just learning a trade, you're learning a conscious trade," he says. "If a green job were available for me, I would be one of the first people in line."

King's also been pretty busy spreading the word about green jobs. Many of his friends had no idea what they are, so he had to spend a lot of time educating them.

"They're like, `Man, what's a green job?' so then I tell them, 'It's a job like recycling or landscaping.' In my circle of friends, my peoples know now."

Tomorrow is Independence Day

JD — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 16:55:50 MDT

With the holiday fast approaching, please take a moment to check out the thoughtful column by Tracy Dingmann over at the New Mexico Independent... Dissent is Patriotic

Debbie Rodella: A Case of Trickle-Down Bribery

Parnelli Gonzales — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:46:36 MDT

State Representative Debbie Rodella is in the news again, testing New Mexico's shaky ethics laws. This time it revolves around the Rio Arriba County Democrat's practice of using her campaign funds to give small gifts to voters for things like phone cards, Christmas parties and funeral expenses.

In a letter to the state Attorney General requesting an advisory opinion as to the legality of this practice, Rodella wrote that her intent was to "garner good will from these men and women and their family and friends." She further described the gifts as "random acts of kindness." (For more see Abq. Journal - "Rodella To AG: Define A Bribe")

On Tuesday, the Santa Fe New Mexican got to the heart of the problem with Rodella's campaign practices:

"Random acts of kindness" is how the representative coyly characterizes her largesse.

She's performed such acts often enough to raise eyebrows, and questions of impropriety -- mainly because it isn't her own money she's giving away; it's her campaign fund, replenished from time to time by big interests who'd like her to think kindly of them when key legislation comes up.

(Santa Fe New Mexican)

That's it in a nutshell. There is a logic to all this. Consider how it works:

* Debbie gives small gifts to win the gratitude - and the votes -- of families in her district -- "targeted" acts of kindness, if you will.

* Of course, this isn't cash out of Debbie's pocket. It's money from her campaign account - money she got in the form of campaign contributions.

* And who gives Rodella those campaign contributions in the first place? The SF New Mexican calls them "big interests." That's exactly right. Since 2004, Rodella has collected almost $74,000 from big special interests. Here's a detailed analysis by industry sector of her campaign finance reports (source: Ethics Division, NM Secretary of State):

29% - healthcare, insurance and pharmaceuticals
15% - banking and payday lending
13% - liquor and tobacco
11% - land development
10% - corporate lobbyists
10% - gas, oil and energy
7% - gambling
4% - telecommunications
1% -waste management

* Here's the kicker. So why, you ask, does big industry give Rodella so much? It's pretty obvious. She chairs the very powerful House Business and Industry Committee. That's the committee where insurance reform, environmental health and predatory lending bills go to die - or at least be amended beyond recognition. And it's where corporate-friendly bills pass through like the proverbial crap through a goose.

So when Debbie so generously peels off a crisp hundred to "help out" a voter's family with the cost of a funeral, what the recipient doesn't realize is that what they're getting is truly chump change compared to the tens of thousands Debbie has received due to the original "kindness" of her corporate clients at the legislature. Trickle down bribery.

At the end of the day, it's Rodella's constituents who are getting screwed when she promotes the corporate agenda at the expense of her district's interests on an issue like healthcare.

More backstory: Debbie's other act of kindness

This isn't the first time that Rodella provoked controversy over her use of campaign funds. There was the occasion in 2006 when she spent $7,500 from her campaign account on mailers and other materials for the campaign of her husband, Tommy Rodella, in his magistrate judge race in Democratic Primary. He narrowly won that election over five other opponents. Other than his wife's expenditures, Tommy raised a grand total of just $50 from two other donors. (see Albuq. Journal, August 8, 2007, "N.M. Candidates Can Be Two-for-One Deals")

Alas, Debbie's efforts to advance her husband's career came crashing down in May of this year, when the state Supreme Court voted unanimously to remove Judge Rodella from office for judicial misconduct. (SF New Mexican)

A bribe is a bribe is a bribe...

There you have it. Chalk all of this up as just one more case study on why we need campaign contribution limits and Clean Elections public financing reforms in New Mexico.

(Postscript: Heaven help you if you try to use the NM Secretary of State's website to access campaign finance reports. It's hit and miss at best. More on that train wreck in a later post.)

Perverse Incentives Destroying Health Care

Matt Brix — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 17:40:38 MDT

As aggregate spending on health care in the United States approaches $2.5 trillion (yes, that's trillion with a "T"), there is growing concern that people might be getting less than what they are paying for.

Per capita spending on health care in the United States far exceeds that of any other industrialized nation in the world. Yet, Americans are still less healthy than people living in other countries, in terms of life expectancy, infant mortality rate and survival rates for chronic disease.

If the United States has the best health care in the world, as is often the refrain when discussions of reform arise, then these indisputable indicators of American health would look very different.

The unfortunate reality is that the American health care system is infested with perverse incentives, resulting in a lower quality of care for a much higher cost.

Students graduating from medical school today face daunting loan sums, often exceeding $150,000. Graduates interested in research or family practice need only look at the numbers to realize that opting instead to become a specialist almost certainly means an income two or three times higher. On the face of it, this looks like simple supply and demand, but consider what a system with diminishing emphasis on primary care, wellness and prevention means for the health of a population.

The perverse incentives keep coming once a doctor begins practicing medicine. The trend to improve efficiency via electronic medical records is picking up steam at the state and federal level. But, while insurance companies often reap the greatest benefits of the move to electronic records, the cost of care keeps rising. So, a worthy idea (electronic medical records) gets put on hold because there is little benefit for both doctor and patient.

Finally, consider the use of cutting-edge technology to detect early signs of heart disease. On the face of it, capitalizing on American ingenuity to prevent medical problems from escalating appears to be a solution to our problems. However, research indicates that the use of new medical technology is more often driven by monetary incentives than improved medical outcomes.

Perverse incentives are slowly eroding our health care in the United States. We must recognize this dynamic and begin the hard work of restoring the patient as the focal point of our system.

Cronyism at UNM?

Tracy Dingmann — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:44:20 MDT

New Mexicans can rest assured that there is no cronyism at the University of New Mexico, according to....the University of New Mexico?

As reported by the Albuquerque Journal, a recent internal investigation by UNM officials found no evidence to support a whistle-blower's charges of cronyism in the hiring and promotions of 21 employees. The whistle-blower, who requested and got anonymity from UNM, said in a formal complaint to president David Schmidly that the 21 employees - who included past state employees and relatives of state employees - had received plum positions or promotions without merit or without going through the competitive hiring practices required by state and university policy.

According to the whistleblower, the actions occurred after the arrival in 2004 of David Harris, who was then acting president and is now UNM's chief financial and chief operating officer. Since 2004, the combined raises of those 21 employees - who included the heads of UNM's human resources department and internal audit division - added up to almost $900,000, the whistleblower alleged.

In a recent meeting with the Journal, Schmidly called the investigation a vindication for the school.

But not everyone at UNM sees it that way.

Balloon Museum, Bad Acts and Mayoral Hot Air

eli il yong lee — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:36:05 MDT

Following the landmark investigative piece by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Eileen Welsome two months ago about problems at the Albuquerque Balloon Museum (featured right here at clearlynewmexico.com), more has come out on this story.

The Journal recently reported about skyrocketing utility costs at the Museum due to Schiff's grandiose and shortsighted architectural design -- a story that totally contradicts the highly publicized "Green City" posturings of Schiff's sponsor, Mayor Martin Chavez. (Journal, subscription required)

Then former Mayor Jim Baca blogged with his take on the whole affair, commenting on the implications of a recent federal court ruling in the Courthouse Kickback Scandal while disclosing still more Schiffian shenanigans.

Here's Jim's take at onlyinnewmexico.com:

Bad Acts

A Federal District Judge has said that prior 'bad acts' can be considered in the trial of Senator Manny Aragon etal. in the Metro Court Scandal. One of the key players in that affair was Mayor Martin Chavez' friend, Architect Marc Schiff. If those bad acts are considered, one of them should be the whole process around the design and execution of the construction of the Albuquerque Balloon Museum. I got a rather long letter from a long time employee of the city who laid out some incredible actions that were taken on that project. Here is an excerpt:

"When Marty came back after Jim Baca's term, it was open humor around City Hall that Marc(Schiff) got back his key to City Hall. Here's how it works, if you have an unethical architect. It's best to start with an architecturally naïve client. (This describes the majority of clients and the Balloon Museum board was certainly that in spades.) Pay little attention to program. This, many experienced clients and good architects will argue, is perhaps the most important part of any successful project. (The Balloon Museum board had no experience here, and largely rejected or ignored things I and others suggested. They were ripe for the pickings."

What else is going to come out of the Balloon Museum? Did Mayor Marty and indicted architect Marc Schiff, one of Mayor Marty's closest allies, put this Museum on the fast money track? And if so, why?

Following the story

As this Balloon Mueseum story continues to unfold, we're rooting for the Albuquerque Journal to give us in-depth coverage. For our part at Clearly New Mexico, we're proud of the fact that our lowly little website provided the vehicle for Eileen Welsome's investigative piece that raised the first real questions about the Balloon Museum scam. Competition in the public interest is a good thing.

It's worth recalling that Eileen came to national prominence with her Pulitzer Prize winning story for the Albuquerque Tribune in 1993 on the human radiation experiments at Los Alamos. On that particular occasion, the Trib happened to scoop the Journal. Curious indeed, however, was the manner in which the Journal flat out ignored her story after it broke. It should be noted that the national media was slow to react as well. Hat tip to LP at FBIHOP for finding this:

The morning Albuquerque Journal, the Tribune's 123,000-circulation JOA partner, ignored the story initially, picking it up weeks later. On the second day of the series, the local AP bureau sent out a 400-word piece, while Scripps-Howard, which owns the Tribune, carried a 1,300-word piece on its wire service. The New York Times ran the AP story - on page 30. USA Today ran a one-paragraph blurb. The Los Angeles Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post didn't report it at all.

see NM FBIHOP

Mt. Taylor Takes a Breather (Parts 1 & 2)

Is your last name Jar? — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:21:34 MDT

The New Mexico State Cultural Properties Review Committee recently made a highly controversial decision to temporarily designate Mt. Taylor as a Traditional Cultural Property. This decision gives the five nominating tribes (Acoma, Laguna, Hopi, Zuni, and the Navajo Nation) exactly one year to back up their claims of its sacred nature.

I attended the public meeting, which took place Saturday, June 14 in the Grants High School Gymnasium. It was here that NM State Cultural Properties Review Committee heard two emotionally charged sides of this complex story. Oddly enough, both sides had segregated themselves to the point where one would have assumed that this battle was pre-planned and seats had been assigned.

On one side of the gym you had ranchers, private property owners, and others representing mining interests. The majority happened to be white and Hispanic, and was wearing green stickers that said "It's Our Mountain Too." Tribal representatives, natives, and other advocates who were there to support the cause made up the other half of the gym. The council sat between the two ready to hear their testimonies.

As the tribal leaders spoke and introduced themselves one by one in their native tongues I remember feeling extremely nervous that someone from the other side was going to make a rude or inappropriate comment. As it was, the hint of groans and a sense of impatience emanated from the opposing side and filled the room.

The tribes mainly addressed how the sacredness of Mt. Taylor was related to their unique cultures in such a way that their livelihoods actually depended on its continued existence. They expressed quiet dignity as they spoke not only about how the mountain affected them, but how it was important to preserve it for everyone's benefit.

After a brief intermission, the floor was opened to the public and people were allowed their time to speak at the podium. It was at this point that the real underlying questions and concerns that brought this designation to the floor in the first place finally came out...

No Help At All

Matt Brix — Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:24:37 MDT

Over the last week, we here at Clearly New Mexico have registered our disgust with the direction of the debate and the level of rhetoric over American energy policy (link)(link). Billions of dollars in public subsidies for oil and gas companies continue, while productive incentives for renewable energy languish. And, the inane idea of drilling for oil in coastal areas on the outer continental shelf is being billed as a legitimate response to the problem of $4.00 per gallon.

The Albuquerque Journal (subscription required) saw fit to ignore reality and jump on the "black gold" bandwagon in its Sunday editorial. Like Congress and the president, the Journal is no help at all for the people of New Mexico.

Because the president and his apologists in the press are beating the domestic drilling drum, I though it might be interesting to find out just what kind of a marginal effect, if any, increased American oil exploration would have. So, I did what any armchair research novice would do; I jumped on Google.

My grandiose plans of finding a slick econometric analysis quickly ended when I came across a story on NPR, one that put the nonsense about offshore drilling into simple perspective.

Henry Lee of the Kennedy School of Government talks about the 8-14 year time line for getting outer continental shelf drilling on-line and fully operational. High-end estimates put daily production at about 1 million barrels per day, or less than 1% of the world's daily oil consumption. This is hardly the kind of volume that would make a discernible dent. Plus, with growing needs from China, India and other Asian countries, oil from the outer continental shelf would have virtually zero impact on world demand. (NPR story)

There you have it. When it comes to finding a sensible solution to the related crises of skyrocketing fossil fuel costs and global climate change, leaders in Washington are ignoring plain facts. Instead of serving the public interest, leaders in Washington, and our own Albuquerque Journal, are no help at all.

Big Oil's NM Campaign Contributions

eli il yong lee — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 08:08:33 MDT

Last week, President Bush called for renewed off-shore drilling. The New York Times criticized Bush's plan, calling it "The Big Pander to Big Oil."

True Majority has a good analysis of oil and gas contributions to New Mexico's Congressional delegation (link).
Senator Pete Domenici (R-NM)
Accepted $348,008 from the oil and gas industry since 2000.
Supported the industry in 78% of selected votes.

Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)
Accepted $262,635 from the oil and gas industry since 2000.
Supported the industry in 44% of selected votes.

Representative Steven Pearce (R-NM02)
Accepted $421,990 from the oil and gas industry since 2000.
Supported the industry in 100% of selected votes.

Representative Tom Udall (D-NM03)
Accepted $3,500 from the oil and gas industry since 2000.
Supported the industry in 27% of selected votes.

Representative Heather Wilson (R-NM01)
Accepted $268,826 from the oil and gas industry since 2000.
Supported the industry in 82% of selected votes.

Let's see how far the Big Pander extends to New Mexico.

Irresponsible and Hypocritical

Matt Brix — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 10:13:05 MDT

Yesterday, Senate Republicans blocked an important bill from coming to the Senate floor. The bill would have extended billions of dollars in tax credits to the renewable energy industry. In an effort to refrain from sending the nation further into debt, the bill proposed paying for the incentive package by taxing the hedge fund industry (you know, the very industry that is driving oil prices up through speculation). (Abq. Journal story link)

This is maddening.

At a time in which regular Americans are getting hammered by high gas prices, forty-two Senators decided that being irresponsible with the federal budget was more important than the need for renewable energy.

Evidence? What a Novel Concept!

Matt Brix — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:25:12 MDT

One of the most disconcerting aspects of politics is the ascendancy of policies that are without merit. Examples of this dynamic on the federal level include the 2001 and 2003 federal tax cuts.

The so-called red light program is a local example of the very same dynamic. Remember, the red light program was ostensibly developed for public safety reasons, not to pad the city budget.

When policy is made by way of blind ideology, or to mask budgetary shortcomings, we the people eventually pay the price.

Nowhere is this truer than in the realm of health care.

For years, even decades, there have been discussions about how to cover more people, while simultaneously preventing insurance premiums from outpacing inflation. Needless to say, trends indicate an abject failure on both fronts.

I believe a primary reason for failing to extend coverage and keep costs manageable is the skyrocketing growth of money's role in the political process. Perverse incentives that push medical students away from primary care work are a big problem. So is the fact that our system places a heavy emphasis on treating sickness, instead of promoting wellness. But, the influence of money on the political process, which creates conditions unfit for truly evidence-based discussions, is the real elephant in the room.

There must be an honest recognition that we are stuck in a quagmire. The existing process is simply not equipped to make evidence-based decisions regarding the overhaul of our health care system.

In order to develop sustainable solutions to the looming health care crisis, New Mexico must develop a process that will allow for evidence-based outcomes. The only option for such a process is the development of an independent health care authority.

Renewable Energy: Time to Go Forward

eli il yong lee — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 07:34:19 MDT

The Consumer Price Index, the key measure of inflation, just went up to 4.2%. The US Department of Labor places the blame squarely on rising fuel costs.

Last Friday's Albuquerque Journal editorialized, "If Tecton strikes natural gas, the drilling needs to be done in compliance with strict standards on air quality, noise and visual pollution. There's a long way to go before alternative energy sources free us from reliance on fossil fuel. In the meantime, we simply don't have the luxury of arbitrarily blocking oil and gas."

Has anyone asked Westsiders how they feel about having drilling in their backyard? And just when would the Journal like to get started on developing alternative energy sources? When gas hits $9 a gallon, like it is in many parts of Europe?

It seems like America's reliance on oil has gotten us to where we are now - windfall profits by fossil fuel executives, exorbitant gas prices, runaway global warming, and climate crises like Katrina and the recent flooding in Iowa.

America needs renewable energy now. Starting new fossil fuel endeavors is a step backward, not forward.

If it's Friday, it's time to bury the Perlman story

Parnelli Gonzales — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 19:32:27 MDT

It is being reported that Mayor Martin Chavez's right-hand man is out. Bruce Perlman, Chief Administrative Officer for the City of Albuquerque, abruptly resigned this afternoon. (NM Independent)

Chavez made no comment about his long-time friend's departure. But curiously, the Mayor's office announced that Perlman's replacement has already been named -- Chief Operations Officer Ed Adams.

Before coming in as CAO three years ago, Perlman was a chief bag man for the Mayor. He was one of the ring leaders of ABQPAC, Chavez's notorious slush fund. The City Ethics Board found Chavez guilty in that affair.

Go figure. When a huge story like this gets released late on a Friday afternoon without mayoral comment, you know that the political objective was to bury it.

Just a few weeks ago, when a highly respected City department head resigned suddenly with no warning, the subsequent mayoral press release simply said she left to "write a novel."

Can't wait to read Perlman's.

What's your healthcare nightmare?

Tracy Dingmann — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 15:23:57 MDT

Do you have insurance but still can't afford care? Have you experienced a health care nightmare?

Real stories are often overlooked.

That's why we want to hear about your story. Send us an email us and tell us about your experiences with the health care system. We may even share some of your stories (anonymously) on our blog.

Email your story to:
tracy.healthcare.clearlynm@gmail.com

Showing Their Real Priorities

Matt Brix — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:01:22 MDT

Major General Mel Montaño of Albuquerque has a stinging critique in today's Las Cruces Sun News. In the piece, Montaño takes President George Bush, Senator John McCain, Congressman Steve Pearce and Congresswoman Heather Wilson to task for refusing to support Senator Jim Webb's (D-VA) GI Bill.

The flagship provision of the bill is to provide full college scholarships for veterans that served in either Afghanistan or Iraq. The bill's annual price tag is estimated at $3-$4 billion-a paltry sum to help our returning service men and women. We spend more in Iraq on any given week.

By opposing this common sense initiative, we have to ask President Bush, Senator McCain, Congressman Pearce and Congresswoman Wilson where their priorities lie.

Not Getting Any Easier

Matt Brix — Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:23:08 MDT

As if on cue, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform will gather this Thursday to mark up what should be an interesting report.

Now this isn't just any report on accounting practices or procurement problems in an obscure agency. Nope. This is a report on Jack Abramoff's contacts and connections with the White House.

A rather tenacious fellow from California named Henry Waxman chairs the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. This is a sampling of how Congressman Waxman runs his committee, especially in the face of a hostile witness and a less than supportive ranking member. Really, the guy does not pull punches.

The issue of nefarious connections between people in positions of power and those who ostensibly petition their government through lobbying has been well documented. Also well documented is the trouble this dynamic causes when the connections are built with money (gifts, travel, meals, beverages, large campaign contributions, etc.).

But, Thursday's hearing raises another dynamic-the proverbial gift that keeps on giving.

The Abramoff scandal broke before the 2006 mid-term elections, causing a backlash against the party in power at the time. Incumbents from the party in power were thrown out in favor of new faces promising ethics reform. Here we are two years later and this particular ethics scandal is still haunting Members of Congress and the White House.

Bottom line, this theme of exposing nefarious connections and striving for reform is not going away. Not in Washington and certainly not in Santa Fe.

(See the the irresistible force meet the immovable object, courtesy of TPM.)

Cap-and-Dividend: An Elegant Solution

eli il yong lee — Mon, 09 Jun 2008 06:45:56 MDT

When Peter Barnes co-founded the Working Assets long distance company, he bridged socially responsible values with a wildly successful business model. Barnes is back at it again, turning seemingly disconnected objectives into elegant solutions.

Barnes is the leading proponent for something called "cap-and-dividend," which just may become the solution we need for the dual-headed hydra of the climate crisis and rising energy costs.

Cap-and-dividend is brutally simple. Industries that choose to output carbon into the air would be charged for that right. With consensus among most scientists that we need a drastic reduction in carbon if we are to avoid irreversible damage to the planet, the "supply" of carbon credits would diminish, forcing carbon polluters to pay more for carbon emissions.

Then all this money - estimated by many to reach hundreds of billions of dollars per year - would go back to the very people that are harmed by carbon emissions - you. Just as Alaska provides a regular dividend to each of its citizens, the Barnes proposal would do the same for all Americans, to help offset the cost of higher fossil fuel energy prices. (Of course, this dividend is critical because we fully expect carbon-emitting industries to pass the costs on to us, rather than eat into their record-breaking profits.)

A nice little addendum that Barnes argues for is to make better use of the massive subsidies currently given to fossil fuel industries. For example, right now, there's $120 billion in subsidies just sitting and waiting for new coal burning plants. Let's take these subsidies and give them to renewable energy technology and investments, and maybe even green jobs proposals.

Barnes has a history of innovative, elegant solutions. I think he's struck gold with cap-and-dividend.

Ethics Earthquake: The old order takes a thumpin'

Parnelli Gonzales — Sat, 07 Jun 2008 06:52:07 MDT

The earth moved on Tuesday. The June 3rd primary election left in its wake an altered legislative landscape. While the aftershocks are only just beginning, one thing is already apparent. A seismic shift has started that is substantially brightening the prospects for passage of ethics reform in the state of New Mexico.

In Albuquerque, the ground opened up and swallowed three supposedly unbeatable Democratic warhorses - and most significantly two powerful committee chairmen. All three of them were beneficiaries of a Roundhouse culture fueled by copious gratuities from lobbyists and gobs of campaign money from industry special interests. All three of them were roadblocks to reform.

Voters send a message

In Senate District 17, Shannon Robinson, a 21-year incumbent and chairman of the Corporations Committee was crushed by political newcomer Tim Keller - 66% to 34%.

In Senate District 14, James Taylor, a 14-year legislative veteran, took a thumpin' at the hands of former Albuquerque City Councilor Eric Griego - 63% to 37%.

And in probably the biggest upset of all, Dan Silva in House District 13, a 23-year incumbent and chairman of the House Transportation Committee, was defeated by Local 1199 union organizer Eleanor Chavez - 54% to 46%.

And there were two more very close calls.

In SD 30, incumbent David Ulibarri - known as "Senator Yellowcake" for his relentless promotion of a revival of uranium mining in his mostly Cibola County district, was clinging to a five vote lead over Clemente Sanchez at the time of this post, with a recount in process. (In this three-person race, the anti-incumbent Sanchez-June Lorenzo vote combined is 63%.)

Finally, in Albuquerque South Valley's Senate District 11, Rules Committee chair Linda Lopez barely avoided another stunning incumbent downfall by a slim margin (53%). Under Lopez's chairmanship, Senate Rules became known as the Devil's Island for ethics reform bills. It's where they were sent-enced to languish and rot as the session clock ran down.

During the campaign, Lopez, along with Taylor and Silva, were stung by criticism for their advocacy of a multi-multi-million dollar taxpayer giveaway to a California based developer, SunCal. A pre-election "get out the vote" picnic sponsored by SunCal to "honor" the legislators it had in the corporate tank raised eyebrows in the media.

As is the case with Congress, the incumbent re-election rate to the N.M. legislature is well over 90%. So the toppling of three such prominent and powerful legislators - in a primary election and by landslide margins no less -- is historically unprecedented.

Yet voters in these five distinct districts all sent the same unmistakable message. It was a collective rebuke of the special interest money-driven way business has been conducted in at the State Capitol. It was a call for ethics reform.

Lest we forget that in February of this year, Santa Fe voters weighed in on this ethics fight by passing "Clean Elections" public campaign financing for city elections, joining Albuquerque, which adopted the same reform with 71% voter approval.

All of which leaves us with the big question: Will those lawmakers left standing get the message?

At the national level, at least one Democrat does get it:
USA Today, 6/6/08)

Barack Obama put his stamp on the party Thursday, announcing the Democratic National Committee would no longer accept donations from political action committees or federal lobbyists. That brings the party in line with his campaign's policy… "We are going to change how Washington works," he said.

For those New Mexico legislators and lobbyists, those "wall leaners" and "alligators" -- for anyone still stuck in the mindset of deep denial, here's a handy compendium of a few of the media and blog stories that grasp the point the voters were making so eloquently on Tuesday:

Bring It On!

Tracy Dingmann — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 14:48:17 MDT

Tuesday night the nation's two major political universes swung into alignment and the choice of candidates finally became clear - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama will face Republican Sen. John McCain in the race for president.

At last, Americans can begin to envision the presidential race as it will actually happen, without the messy hypothetical scenarios that have threatened to obscure a much-needed focus on the issues.

McCain himself has kicked off the ideological fray, challenging Obama to debate him in a series of town-hall type meetings in towns across the United States.

We at Clearly New Mexico welcome the chance to compare the candidates as they face off in forums that will provide little opportunity for evasion or spin.

We've got a scant 151 days for Obama and McCain to square off and let the public decide whose policies make the most sense regarding pressing issues like health care, taxes, climate change and the Iraq War.

McCain vs Obama, hashing it out toe-to-toe on a stage near you?

Bring it on!

Bold Gift Ban

Matt Brix — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:19:30 MDT

Yesterday, the New Mexico Independent highlighted the University of New Mexico Hospital's new ban on gifts from pharmaceutical companies. It seems UNMH has correctly identified the potential conflict of interest that comes with gifts from reps of big pharma.

The New Mexico state legislature has taken action on limiting gifts. Taking a page from UNMH and banning all gifts would go a long way toward giving New Mexicans confidence in the legislative process.

Featured Posts