Denish: GOP candidates campaigning ‘in the dark’
Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
Diane Denish says it’s ironic that the GOP is criticizing campaign contributions she’s accepted when she’s been more transparent about her campaign’s finances than the Republican candidates.
The comments from the campaign of Denish, the presumptive Democratic gubernatorial nominee, come a day after state Republican Party Chairman Harvey E. Yates Jr. raised questions about big campaign contributions Denish accepted in a guest column published on this site.
Denish accepted more than $50,000 from Leo Hindery Jr., with about half of it coming a month after Hindery secured a $30 million investment from the State Investment Council. The investment was recommended by Saul Meyer, the state’s former investment adviser, who has admitted to recommending “investments that were pushed on him by politically-connected individuals in New Mexico” in pleading guilty to unrelated charges in New York.
“Is this ‘pay to play’ unveiled, evidencing that Denish and Richardson are wrapped in the same corruption package?” Yates asked. “Perhaps. But, we need more information to know for sure — information which probably can be secured only by law enforcement officials armed with subpoena power.”
Denish spokesman Chris Cervini wrote in an e-mail response that it’s “ironic that the Republicans are attacking Lt. Gov. Diane Denish’s campaign contributions when they’ve chosen to run their campaigns in the dark, refusing to follow Lt. Gov. Denish’s lead and disclose contributions more frequently than the law requires.”
“While Lt. Gov. Denish is running the most open and transparent campaign in the state, Republicans are continuing negative attacks and demonstrating they do not have the leadership or ideas New Mexicans deserve during these difficult times,” Cervini wrote.
He’s referring to Denish’s practice of releasing campaign finance reports to the public quarterly in off-election years, though the law only requires that she does it twice a year. Denish is expected to voluntarily release a report in the next couple of weeks of her fundraising and spending from the fourth quarter of 2009.
I’ve asked each of the Republican gubernatorial candidates if any would match Denish in releasing a fundraising report this month. None have responded.
9 Comments
Leave a Response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This is getting fun … the experts are going to find that largest war chest isn’t the key this year and can be a liability. WHY do the entities Hemingway cited give so much to someone that doesn’t need it? How DOES Diane explain that … along with the commonality of donors with Bill? Someone likes that continuity. The campaigns this year are about character, integrity, the ability to solve problems, and the ability to deliver a figurative knockout punch while normally not punching folks in the nose. THIS is a different year – people are pissed about being lied to, about the deceit and profiteering.
qofdisks, I beg to differ: look at the recent victories by the “progressives” in the Las Cruces council election. All of those who won were out raised in some instances 2-1, and yet 2 of the 3 decimated their opponents, and the third though winning by only a slim margin was out raised by a substantial amount. It doesn’t just come down to money–though that certainly helps–instead it’s a number of issues: timing, organization, where money is spent, message, etc.
The big real estate firms including Suncal (Westland) have given Lt. Governor Denish over $150,000 in her gubernatorial political campaign. No doubt all these real estate firms are looking for big favors. Also, Lt. Governor Diane Denish’s husband is an urban planning consultant. One of her big political donors is Forest City Covington NM, LLC ($15,000) for which her husband is an an agent. This should be explained since Lt. Gov. Denish is running the most open and transparent campaign in the state .
Jeremiah, figure it out. The need to raise vast amounts of money for campaigns is independent of party affiliation if a candidate intends to win. Singling out Richardson and Denish is childish and naive. It is exactly those that most successfully raise money that succeed in winning office. If a Republican wins a position it is because that person commands a huge amount of money for campaigning. Our politics is more about a fund raising race than getting votes based on principles and vision.
MacQuigg had some good info … Arnold-Jones has a list posted on her web site, so ‘good get’ – it isn’t searchable but looks like she tries to do the best she can with available funds. But if you look at his web site, which is appropriately named – Diogenes – he is fairly consistent in his arguments, logic, and sense for openness. The flashlight of transparency is very inconsistent in the Denish campaign – while publishing a donor list on the Secretary of State website is a good thing, it also serves as a warning to possible challengers. Where is the openness on the misappropriation of federal funds through her office, buying Christmas cards and flight time in aircraft?
Thank you gofdisks for the insight …. so the millions that have been raised by Richardson and Denish have been forms of bribery – glad you finally figured that out
westernsun,
How can Diane Denish point to ANY campaign contributions made to her opponents if they do not disclose those donations? Talk about a catch 22! As it is, the name of the game in politics is fund raising so don’t get upset when a politician actually raises funds. If you don’t think fund raising is unethical and that it smacks of legal bribery of officials, well wake up! That IS our system for selection of our leaders.
Can denish point to a 25 k contribution that one of her opponents got from someone who was given a 30 million investment of state money? Then maybe her call would be taken a little more seriously. Yawn.
Of all the transparency issues, open meetings, public records, searchable databases, webcasting, etc., how high on the list is offering to report campaign donations more frequently than the law requires. It is a mountain being made of a molehill. It is my understanding that Janice Arnold-Jones will be reporting her contributions real time as soon as she can make the switch. Her contributions will be published on her website as soon as they are made.
Campaign finance report frequency is a non-starter.
We need to look deeper for real transparency.