Contact
Subscribe
McCamley says choice is a reformer or more of the same
Bill McCamley
District 5 Public Regulation candidate Bill McCamley says there’s a “fairly obvious” contrast between him and his opponent when it comes to ethics.
McCamley, a Democrat, said he “personally rewrote” portions of the Doña Ana County ethics ordinance when he was a county commissioner “to put barriers between commissioners and special interests.” He worked on reforming the county’s election system. He served on the governor’s ethics reform task force in 2007. He was a Common Cause Board member in 2009.
“I have experience and passion when it comes to this issue,” McCamley said during a recent interview.
By contrast, McCamley said his opponent, Republican Ben Hall, had a record when he served in the state Legislature in the late 1980s and early 1990s of “voting for big corporations, insurance companies and banks.” For example, he said Hall voted against forcing insurance companies to cover mammograms.
McCamley also pointed to court records that show Hall has been sued a number of times for failing to pay taxes as evidence that Hall doesn’t follow the rules.
And in a recent article published by the New Mexico Independent, Hall was quoted as saying that he’s skeptical that structural reforms can help clean up the scandal-plagued PRC. Instead, Hall was quoted as saying, commissioners must lead by example.
“He said that we don’t need structural changes for ethics,” McCamley said. “… Maybe the reason for that is he likes to represent big corporations and special interests.”
Ethics reform
With the PRC having faced so many ethical problems – even now, a current commissioner is under indictment for misusing the state’s public financing system – McCamley wants to contrast the race as being between a reformer and more of the same.
McCamley said the PRC needs to increase accountability and transparency and “strengthen barriers between the commission and staff and special interests.”
As an example of something that needs to change, McCamley cited the money involved in the PNM rate increase case. He said the company has budgeted $2.4 million for legal representation in the case, while the AG has one lawyer and $100,000 to represent “the people.”
“That’s not exactly equitable,” McCamley said. “Those are the sorts of systematic processes we need to examine to make sure that we hold these companies accountable. … The basic job of the PRC is to represent the little guy against big corporations.”
McCamley also wants to make the insurance superintendent – “probably the most powerful appointed position in the state” – more accountable. How? He’s not sure, but he knows that there is currently “no direct accountability in that office.”
He has two ideas. One is to make the office a statewide elected position. The other is to give the PRC authority to approve decisions made by the insurance superintendent before they become official.
“Either way, there’s some accountability to the people,” McCamley said.
McCamley wants to expand webcasting. The PRC already streams audio of its meetings online, but he wants to include video, and to archive webcasts so people can watch them whenever they have time.
He also wants to consider changing the PRC’s meeting schedule to give commissioners more time to spend in their districts. Currently, the commission meets Tuesday and Thursday of each week. He plans to propose that the PRC meet Monday-Thursday one week and not at all the next week so commissioners – especially those who represent districts far from Santa Fe – have more time for constituent services.
Other items on McCamley’s agenda
Ethics reform isn’t the only item on McCamley’s agenda. He hopes to help expand the use of wind, solar and other alternative energy sources. He wants to look at adding distance education courses for people training to be volunteer firefighters so they don’t have to spend as much time at the state’s fire academy in Socorro.
And McCamley wants to consider streamlining some state services. He said the state needs to examine duplicate services in different offices to determine whether they are needed. For example, businesses have to register with the PRC and secretary of state, but he said perhaps they don’t need to do both.
McCamley pointed out that he tried to debate many of these issues with Hall, but Hall refused.
“I would hope that people would choose someone who has the courage to have these public conversations,” McCamley said. “If you can’t have that dialogue, you can’t stand up to the big folks.”
As I’ve disclosed in the past, I’m friends with McCamley. Click here to read more about that.
|
Share
Tweet
|
Advertisements
|
27 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Rorschach1492 your question about Gary Carruthers, the answer is YES he is! I like the way you never continue with a discussion when someone offers you facts and proof, like you ask, you just throw out another argument, classic!
As to his “Progressive” philosophy just ask him? I never talked about the Spaceport, it is clearly a boon doggle regardless of who supports it. I bet those millions of dollars could have gone to something better for all of NM like child care, schools, roads or anything else you can think of other than building a “spaceport” for the richest folks in the country to use. How are those jobs coming for you guys down there?
I, too know Bill and agree that he is a nice person. I also know Martinez. The races though are not about nice. While the gov candidates have conveniently skirted the economy and jobs, McCamley has not. You apparently have missed my point. It is Bill’s politics and willingness to commit to issues now that are the problem.
He may have had Teague whipped in the past race, but lost anyway. My sense is that the more Bill talks the more he will end up like the other Bill, having made promises that he cannot keep. The difference is that big Bill could create the jobs, even if they were within his own administration. McCamley cannot.
Sooner or later, we are going to have to start thinking instead of acting like grandmothers and voting for candidates we like. I see that both Estrada and McCamley are such nice boys in that perspective. I am more concerned about whether my children will be able to get jobs here. That is the long term issue in this race.
For all you nay sayers, I worked on Bill McCamley’s race for Congress and I can tell you he had Harry Teague whipped until Teague refused to debate him and then reached into his pocket book and brought out over a million dollars. Bill is erxtremely well educated and is a tireless hard worker. I know he will understand all the rules and regulations in a short period of time and all of you will be proud of his ethical stance on all subjects. I really don’t care if you are a Republican or Democrat, just vote for the best person – Bill McCamley. I was a registered Republican and then changed to Democrat because I thought that was the best thing to do, however, I could just as well become a Republican again, because all I do is vote for the best person regardless of affiliation. I will vote for Bill (Democrat) and Susana (Republican).
I repeat, regardless of our party affiliation. Vote for the besty person in all races
ftrplt
Donna, I get your point. Thankfully, based upon the vote in the primary election, you and those within your own party who agree with you are in the distinct minority. I understand your position regarding Hall and his personal financial record. It also gives me pause, but at least I know what to be concerned about. Regardless of the “ethics” or conduct of the Commissioners of the past, only Jones was tagged with allegations that he/his assistant misused travel money and that amounted to a few hundred dollars. That pales when compared to the damage that can be done through misguided regulation.
I am sure that you would agree that a judge running for office should not spell out that he will rule on the side of the little guy against large insurance companies. That statement spells out bias. A judge is required to rule on the merits of the case, despite his personal feeliings or politics. Regardless of his past I have no idea how Hall might rule on cases before the PRC, but McCamley has made it clear how he views the parties without even hearing the facts. The PRC acts like a judicial panel, hence its decisions are appealed directly to the Supreme Court. Don’t McCamleys campaign statements constitute a statement of bias and predisposition that he will take to the bench?
If that is the case, and I believe it is, then we can forecast how McCamley will vote and act. We certainly know that he will attempt to use the office enforce his vision of how things ought to be. The greatest failure of the PRC is in its inability to fairly judge cases. Its judicial dysfunction creates uncertainty and the efforts by Commissioners to use the bench as a political tool make a mockery of the institution and the process. Their misuse of the office serves to hamper our economy. The Commissioners have used their office to fulfill campaign pledges; to reward some and punish others regardless of the facts in the case. Let me ask you, you say you want more competition but what new insurance company would want to enter our market if it meant that they would become subject to such mercurial “regulators”? Considering McCamley’s open statements of his bias, all we can look forward to is more of the same.
If we had free competition in the insurance and utility industries we would not need the PRC. It exists only because of state law allowing monopolies under a regulatory system. Only one of our new Commissioners will have any relevant background to bring to the office. That coupled with their openly stated predispositions likely indicates that NM and our area in particular will continue to languish in job creation, the recruitment of industry and the expansion of our tax base. These issues are much more troublesome to me than Hall’s past.
@mesillerobob: Since you clearly live in Dona Ana County like I do (Picacho Hills resident here), you would then be aware of the long line of terrible PRC commissioners we have had representing us. First Tony Schaefer with his hot temper and his conflicts of interest from his lobbying activities, then Shirley Baca with her complete lack of knowledge and her pot smoking controversey and now Sandy Jones with his hiring of felons and bad relations with PRC staff.
Let’s not add Ben Hall to this list. We have had enough embarrassment, haven’t we?
I mention Picacho Hills because my neighbors and I have been through terrible times with our local utility for years. We thought Schaefer was our friend and then find out that he’s in cahoots with Steve Blanco. Then Schaefer runs for PRC even though everyone around here knew he was trying to acquire the utility at the time.
The Sun-News won’t report everything, but thankfully the NM Independent is watching the PRC like a hawk:
http://newmexicoindependent.com/61639/picacho-hills-water-company-owner-may-ordered-to-pay-bulk-of-record-1-million-plus-fine
For my husband and I we are first looking to the character and ethics of the candidate first. Then we will consider stance on issues. If you can’t get out the character gate first, you aren’t going to get our vote.
We got to know Estrada and were backing him strongly. We were happy that he got Schaefer removed from the ballot since he didn’t have enough signatures to qualify.
He didn’t win so that’s why we Republicans are voting for Bill McCamley. We’ve had enough.
As a proud independent I must say that sparks is off base. Who the heck is Estrada anyway? If he was so good then how did he lose to Hall? Just because he was hand picked by the Republican party like Barela does not equate to integrity. Hall was the dark horse and will be again, like it or not. And what kind of competition do you think you can get in health insurance and among whom? Just because the Insurance Division is under the PRC does not mean that the Commission has any influence. Their authority is vested in the Superintendent and any change would require a constitutional amendment which is not likely to happen. Get real here. I can see what you want but the rules and system dictate reality. Just like McCamley, you want to believe that things can be different but you fail to recognize the reality of the system.
Like it or not, we created the PRC by constitutional amendment. The key then is working within the system not pretending that it is somehow different just because we would like it to be so. That again and again is my issue with McCamley. The hope that he offers is just an illusion. He says, ” If you can’t have that dialogue, then you can’t stand up against the big folks.” Just who is he referring to? Insurance companies that provide valuable service? Electric, water and gas utilities that provide the basics of life? That is my issue. If McCamley had ever had to make a payroll or take risk in business then he might have a better grounding in what the job is all about. He, if elected will be faced with untenable decisions in which there is no way to keep rates where they are. Business pressures, political pressures will only serve to drive prices up. That is simply an unescapable fact. His bent toward advocacy will only lead to higher rates and costs of service.
Let me put it this way: if Bill and Sparks were to have their way and keep rates low for the little guy, then only the big guys would have to pay the bill. Those big guys are the employers in this state. In Dona Ana County, the little guys pay about 11cents per kWh while the industrial employers pay double that. So, keep talking and vote your way. In the end, you will have low residential rates and no job. Which would you prefer?
I agree with ksparks completely…
I’m a very active Republican but I cannot support Ben Hall…no way, Jose. I will vote for McCamley. Ben Hall doesn’t even support competition for health insurance and after hearing McCamley talk about how he favors competition as much as possible, I feel we might have a fighting chance with him instead of some unethical man who doesn’t even know what Republicans stand for. Ben Hall made me mad because he refused to attend a primary election forum with Estrada and Evans despite my multiple calls and invitations. He’s up to the same games by avoiding debates and interactions with McCamley.
I hope the Democrats return the favor and vote for Dianna Duran for Sec. of State.
Mary Herrera and Ben Hall have a lot in common with the likes of Rebecca Vigil Giron, Jerome Block and David King. All of these people are a tremendous embarrassment to New Mexico! Wake up people!
@proudrepublican: If I remember correctly Gary Carruthers helped chair that committee. Is he a Democrat Party Insider too? Also in regards to McCamley’s “progressive” agenda do you have any specific points regarding this are are you just making a blanket statement? Please provide evidence, you are you just blowing hot air (as I suspect).
Once again, you destroy your own argument when you say that he actually has taken on his own party. I seem to remember his biggest thing, the spaceport, being supported by the Chair of the Republican Party (Sid Goddard) and many Republicans. He also seemed to have their support in his work down in Santa Teresa.
@mesillerobob: You say McCamley has skeletons in his closet? What are they? Can they be researched? Please provide evidence. Otherwise that kind of statement makes no sense. Hall’s closet is so full of skeletons it seems appropriate we are so near Halloween.
Oh and by the way, you stated in a previous post that Hall has “spoken” on his PRC plans… Really? Where? I haven’t seen him anywhere. I heard he showed up to the League of Women Voters forum and did terribly. Other than that, no one has seen hide nor hair of him. I seem to remember from the primary that he didn’t even show up to the Tea Party meeting. His website show nothing about what he wants to do.
And your rant on green energy includes both candidates. One of the few things Hall actually did do was fill out an Albuquerque Journal question sheet. Halls response can be seen here: http://www.abqjournal.com/abqnews/2010-primary-election/21473-prc-district-5-qaa-.html.
His response on renewable energy is: “Renewable energy will be a great thing and in the future I am sure it will become the number one source of energy for New Mexico and the U.S.A. However, the idea of passing the cost onto the consumer must be looked at very carefully … especially in these tough economic times. It sounds great for someone to mandate that we change to renewable energy but, keep in mind it isn’t free.”
What does that mean? He sure doesn’t take as strong a stance against these thing as you would like? Or has he spoken about it somewhere else? Once again, provide evidence for your statements please.
Without any of this evidence you all are, once again, making a choice to support a candidate with clear ethical issues who has not come forward to talk about his stance on issues vs. a clean candidate whom you claim to disagree with (without really providing proof to his stances on the issues other than alternative energy).
Rorschach1492 allow me to begin by addressing your first question about him being a “party insider”. First of all he served on the COunty Commission, then was appointed by “King” Richardson to the Ethics Reform Task Force, maybe he got that appointment because nobody knew who he was? He has run for Congress and now the PRC, that is clearly a career politician and a party insider in my book! Mr. McCamley has strong ties to the Progressive Wing of the Democrat party and has worked hard for them, he has taken on some of the folks who either disagree with the progessive agenda or if it makes for good press for him to oppose somone who clearly everyone is against then he will.
Now on to your second point, I have never said every candidate should take a stand agains all corrupt people in their party but if you are going to run as the “ethical champion” maybe you should have spoken up prior to your election when ethical questions have been in front of you and your party for the last 8 years, that would show real leadership! Now onto your attemp to show Republicans as bad elected officials:
Duke Cunningham: Bad guy who is out of Congress and going to jail, he deserves to go there I am oppossed to all who are guilty of taking bribes regardless of party.
Pat Lyons: Not sure what he has been accused of yet other than trying to make money for the state of NM, which by the way is what he is cahrged with by the NM Constitution. If you can’t see the attacks on him are political in nature you are blind. You do not have to agree with what he is doing but he is making money for the schools and the state as his job say’s he should.
Dan Foley: Never had charges filed on him as a matter of fact a judge from Texas said they meet no burden of proof to file any charges, you should look those stories up on this site they were published here. Maybe you have selective memory?
Jim Schoonover: I can not speak about this candidate I do not know him or anything about him but not sure how helping the Elks Club is a bad thing, kind of like Ben Lujan and the Catholic Church up North?
Susana Martinez should not take a stance against any of the folks becasue as I have clearly proven none of these are crimminal acts that any of these folks have been found guilty of or even have a chance of being found guilty of, except the Congressman you talk about and I can’t believe Susana Martinez is supporting ol’ Duke can you? It is clear from your choice of Republicans that you are hard pressed to find any in NM that have been removed from office for a felony crime, like the PRC Comissioner from up north, gone to jail for pay offs Like the former Senate President Manny Aragon, taken to task and lost their Securities Lisc like the financial support of Bill Richardson, how about the former Secretary of State and the misuse of Federal HAVA funds, do I need to keep going or maybe you get my point. If you can offer up real examples of folks Susana Martinez should take a stance against than lets talk until then you are proving my point why it is time for the democrat control of this state to go away and lets get new leadership running this operation.
Rorshach you misinterpret my comments. It is likely that any candidate running for office has some skeletons in their closet including those for the PRC, Gov and Pres. I recall the reporting about Gore and Bush on cocaine use, Obama has his as did Clinton, etc. Certainly, Hall has his as does McCamley. Again, if it is ok for the Secty of the Treasury to have tax problems in his past, then how do you judge Hall, or is your perspective party blind?
Aside from all the rhetoric about party and past, we have real issues to face in our state. We do not need a progressive with an agenda to push on this post. We need a plain New Mexican. If you are unwilling to cut Hall any slack for past transgressions, then to be consistent we should shelve all candidates who have checkered pasts. That would compromise most national, congressional, senatorial and local candidates.
You tell me just how NM would be able to pay for McCamley’s agenda assuming he were successful in getting it done. You tell me how you would power your computer at night with wind and solar power. You tell me how any of us would have power if no rate increases were ever approved. You tell me how any utility could survive if they could not recoup the costs of mandated efficiency standards. It is easy to talk green and make pledges about serving the little guy especially since it gets you votes. It is like a nutrition planner at schools promising kids candy instead of enforcing good nutrition standards. Regardless of the candidates past employment history or lack thereof, these issues are more important.
I like the Nader proposal. Lets support a binding none of the above. If we could gain such a ballot choice, then it is likely that we all would be able to agree. Based upon the dialogue here, none of the above would win.
@mesillerobob: You say that not paying taxes doesn’t have anything to do with the PRC? Isn’t it the law to pay taxes? Isn’t that kind of an important thing for someone in any elected office, much less one as scandal plagued as the PRC? And how about conflict of interest? Doesn’t the fact that he had these conflict if interest issues bother you? That most certainly could become an issue with the PRC.
You’re justification to yourself in voting for a crook over someone you disagree with politically is interesting. But tell me one thing; how does that make you different than a Democrat who votes for Mary Herrera? Doesn’t that also make you part of the problem.
And speaking of McCamley never “working for a living”, I have been reading this blog a while and was able to remember something he posted a couple of years ago ( http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2008/09/from-the-perspective-of-living-paycheck-to-paycheck/). Have you ever worked as a farm laborer to get by? And I don’t mean in high school as a summer job, but as a full-time, I-need-to-do-this-or-I-will-starve-thing…
@proudrepublican: Please present facts that McCamley is a “Democratic insider”. You yourself pointed out that he took on the Democratic County Clerk when he was here in Dona Ana County. If you lived here (which I doubt), you might also remember that he wanted to take politics out of the Sheriff’s appointment right after he got elected, and his votes meant that the Democratic insider for that job was not appointed. It made the Dona Ana De party infrastructure so mad they all backed Harry Teague in the Congressional election and that constituted the little support he was able to garner here. Without that vote he might be in Congress right now. Tell me that doesn’t show some intestinal fortitude?
And your argument would seem to suggest that every political figure must take a stand against every corrupt officeholder from their own party… Your own words are ” Has he taken a stance against the democrats that have been brought up on charges? Has he been a leader calling for them to resign or step aside while all of this gets settled?”
Ok then. Have you or candidates you support did the same with Republicans. Let’s see if I can think of a couple…
National
- Duke Cunningham… need I say more (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duke_Cunningham). You have to love good old fashioned bribery.
State
- Pat Lyons (Current State Land Commissioner and another candidate for the PRC) has had problems with insider deals to campaign contributers (http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2009/10/philippou-settlement-may-involve-trade-with-land-office/) and is currently being investigated by the AG for problems involving a property up north (http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2009/12/ag-auditor-to-probe-white-peaks-land-deal/).
- Dan Foley (Former State Rep and Minority Whip) was arrested for assaulting a kids’ basketball coach and impeding a police officer at a Gus Macker game (http://www.abqjournal.com/news/state/573806nm06-26-07.htm) and after he he was defeated refused to remove his state license tags (http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/politics/politics_krqe_albuquerque_exrep_caught_with_government_plates_200906292049).
Local
- Jim Schoonover (former Dona Ana County Treasurer and current R Nominee for State Treasurer) was censured by the Dona Ana County Commission, with a conservative Republican in the majority, for “illegally using county staff and equipment to benefit the Elks Lodge and other issues” (http://www.nmpolitics.net/index/2007/02/commission-formally-censures-treasurer-demands-restitution-for-illegal-use-of-county-resources/).
Did any candidate you endorse (like, let’s say, hmmm, Susana Martinez) ever stand up “for them to resign or step aside while all of this gets settled”. I don’t believe so. If you plan on still voting for them, then you sir, are a hypocrite.
Proud republican is right. I admit I was unaware of Hall’s past. Assuming that the info provided by Rorshach is correct then we have a problem. If Hall has cleared up that past, then he deserves to run and take his chances at election. It may be that he has a better perspective now, and besides the PRC has nothing to do with either taxes or contracting. I would guess that if Obama finds Geithner acceptable with his taxing past then I should look past Hall past.
The issue I have with McCamley is the progressive activist attitude that he brings. A PRC Commissioner does not have the ability to look out for the little guy anymore than one can look out for the utility. Statutes require a balance between the two, not an emphasis on one or the other. Rates must be just and reasonable based upon the evidence in the record not based upon a Commissioners assessment. To say otherwise is just electioneering and pandering to the ignorant in order to get elected. My point regarding McCamley’s employment background was not meant to imply that only the rich deserve to be elected, but that Bill brings nothing to the post other than a clear desire for office and the paycheck.
At some point we are going to have to look past the buzz about renewable energy and face the cost factor. Of the two candidates only Hall has spoken regarding the real problems facing the PRC. So far, Hall, like him or not has the clearer view of the issues based upon the actual job of Commissioner as opposed to what someone wants the job to be. McCamley claims to have personally rewritten the code of conduct for the DAC, but he had the press behind him. Now the press rarely attends PRC meetings so how does he think he can get the others to join him in that when he appears to be so far left of even Marks on regulatory attitude?
District 5 needs someone on the PRC who actually understands what the job is. So far, like it or not, Hall is the candidate who has articulated that. McCamley wants it to be something it is not.
Let me start by addressing the question of do I support Republicans or any candidate who do not pay their taxes and the answer is NO! I never said you should vote for Mr. Hall since I do not know enough about him to advocate for him, see I look at more than party and some of you should try that. If the information mentioned about him is true then of course he shouldn’t serve in this or any elected position, unless of course he has paid all the debts he owes and than he can run, I probably wouldn’t support him though. My reason for writiing is Mr. McCamley trying to suggest that he is some “ethics” champion and by continuing to support the notion that the PRC is only for the “little guy”.
Now to you Ben, I have read the Constitution and understand the rule making process for implementing the things Mr. McCamley wants to claim he will do. First of all you say the following:
“ensure fair and reasonable rates and reasonable and adequate services. This is a mission spelled out explicity on the PRC’s website.”
Last time I checked the PRC Web Site is not the final arbitor of rules and regulations and secondly making sure the rates are reasonable and for adequate services doesn’t mean you are “out for the little guy” the little guy will never want to see their rates increased but if the rate increase is justified it should be upheld by the PRC, hard to do that and look out for the little guy uh Ben? Now on to your comments that try to clairfy Mr. McCamley’s claim that he will lead the “Ethical” charge while on the PRC, what has he said about all the problems occuring in the PRC today? Has he taken a stance against the democrats that have been brought up on charges? Has he been a leader calling for them to resign or step aside while all of this gets settled? If so I have missed it and these comments are directed only at the problems on the PRC a position he is running for. How about all the other ethical problems across the state with democrats, or how about the Housing Authority problem that occured while he was on the County Commission I missed his leadership on that issue right there in his own backyard? Finally Ben if you read my comments about “alternative energy” he clearly has already formed an opinon about pushing us in that direction if elected, sounds to me like he has already made up his mind and that is a little scary for a person who is supposed to enter this job without a biased one way or the other? Also seems to highlight his inability to understand in tough times people just don’t have the luxuary to pay for “alternative energy” options when they are working hard just to pay their current utility bill. So maybe you should read my comments and visit with your friend the candidate before posting and thinking you will sound mentally superior to the rest of us when in fact your comments highlight you are not superior to any of us and maybe, just maybe not as smart as you think you are!
OK, jivaro99, let’s see. Would you rather have the choice between Candidate A (McCamley) who apparently has ZERO record of impropriety OR Candidate B (Hall), who seems to have been living in a courtroom as a defendant for the better part of 25 years and went bankrupt because he couldn’t pay his mountain of debt, including taxes?
Given all the crimes of the current batch of PRC commissioners, don’t you think it’s time for someone that won’t embarrass New Mexico?
But I won’t hold my breath. You Republicans had a better choice but many of you decided not to educate yourselves. Maybe people will vote for Hall anyway because they see his stupid signs at every intersection. Or maybe you Republicans like jivaro99 are going to put their ideology first.
I don’t care for everything that McCamley did as a commissioner but I think the guy is actually smart enough to listen to everyone. Hall on the other hand won’t even debate! What does that tell you?!
It would be wise to think back to when McCamley was on the Dona Ana County Commission and remember how he made decisions that were not conducive to the county. He will do no better as a PRC commissioner. He wants to use the PRC as a stepping stone for higher office and to promote his Progressive Democrat ideas.
He is strictly an opportunist that is interested in lining his pockets at the people’s expense. Just think back to the old cliche “fool me once that’s your fault, fool me twice and its my fault. Don’t let yourself be fooled again.
Dear proudrepublican,
Your closing allusion to “caveat emptor” ironically targets the precise opposite of what a Public Regulation Commission is intended to do. The regulation of utilities, telecommunications, et cetera is the function performed by the PRC to ensure fair and reasonable rates and reasonable and adequate services. This is a mission spelled out explicity on the PRC’s website.
You can find it as well in the New Mexico Constitution in Article XI and clarified in the New Mexico statutes, such as 8-8, 62 (“Every rate made, demanded or received by any public utility shall be just and reasonable”). 62 also places energy efficiency within the perview of the PRC. Furthermore, the PRC can improve its internal ethical situation through petition for the enforcing of existing statutes (8-8 and 2-15 for starters.)
This regulation therefore exists in part to protect individuals from being charged unfair and unreasonable rates and to prevent individuals from being given unreasonable and inadequate services. There is the individual on the one hand and the corporate entity on the other. If the corporation requires regulation to prevent it from doing those things to the individual, the PRC can act, which is exactly what McCamley is describing, although he used much smaller words.
Full disclosure: I am, in spite of my propensity to vocally vote for Republicans, a friend of Bill’s. Oh, and I also read our Constitution and the statutes before posting. You can find them online, if you’re inclined to read the law rather than guess at what it says. I don’t always agree with regulation, but I’m in favor of people debating smartly, not louder. Good luck.
Yours,
Ben
proudrepublican….check what Rorschach1492 just wrote. Tell me if you think it’s acceptable to have anyone like that holding office, especially the PRC where there have been lots of problems. Ben Hall has been wrapping himself up in some sort of reform flag when he has a list of unethical practices a mile long!
Or do you Republicans not care when people don’t pay their taxes?
Why hasn’t the Republican Party spoken up about this? Don’t they care when one of their own is discovered having ethical problems?
Im a registered Independent and its because both parties tend to look the other way when one of their own has warts. There is no reason why this should be a partisan issue.
As long as McCamley doesn’t have evidence of ethical problems, then I’m voting for him.
Wow first of all how does Mr. Hall represent the “corruption” Republicans are campaigning against? Mr. McCamley claims serving on Gov. Richardsons Ethics Reform Task Force as a sign he is ethical? Has Mr. McCamley been asleep the last eight years? What ethics did he reform? Was it the ERB, The Housing Authority, The State Investment Council, the Pay to Play rules? I mean come on this administration has been one of the dirtiest and worst ones in the history of the state. When he says the PRC’s job is to protect the “little guy” he is totally wrong! It is just another example of the “big Government” mentality he brings to the table, the belief that Government has all the answers and they are here to protect us from outrselves. He shows his distane for busienss and the very people that are here working to pay the taxes he wants to spend. His desire to push us towards “alternative energy” sources shows how out of touch he is with reality, the cost, even with government subsidies, is more than anyone can or wants to pay.
Mr. McCaley is a career candidate and politician who will say anything to get elected to a possition, his “Progressive” ties and big governement philosophy is exactly what has brought us to the abyss and is the last thng we need on the PRC. Finally some of his plans for changing the PRC are not up to him and have nothing to do with the PRC, maybe he should study up on what his job would be and what if anything he can actually do as a member of the PRC! Funny how quite he has been when it comes to dealing with the corruption of his own party! I know he went after a democrat County Clerk but his silence on the problems with the PRC, almost all of which come form his own party speaks very loud. Mr. McCamley you are no reformer, you are truly a democrat party insider who will clearly be more of the same once you finally get your chance to serve in Santa Fe, buyer beware!
Rorschach1492 – Now we know why Ben Hall is so silent. The record speaks for itself!
@mesillerobo: I assume with that name that you live in Dona Ana County. Do you remember what the County Commission was like before McCamley? Commissioners under FBI investigation, Commissioners stealing electricity, former Commissioners being kicked out of judgeships for cocaine use, fistfights during meetings…
Did any of that happen after McCamley got in there? No. And I seam to remember him promising to work on spaceport construction, health care reform, better inter-governmental relations, and water issues and all of those things got done. So what makes you think he can’t perform here. Do you even know the guy?
And speaking of Ben Hall, and email is going around with his public record on it. He says we need ethical Commissioners in there rather than any sort of “structural reforms”. Well if he is elected we get neither. The following are the contents of that email:
Background:
Ben Hall, age 74, is a retired elected official and contractor who resides in Ruidoso. A thorough examination of available public records reveals several areas of concern for taxpayers.
Financial record (see Appendix)
Failure to pay taxes:
• From 1983-1998 there were 14 tax liens placed on Mr. Hall and his construction company totaling $356,233.89.
• 10 of these liens were for failure to pay Federal taxes, and 4 liens were for failure to pay State taxes.
Failure to pay bills:
• From 1983-1998, there were 7 liens placed on Mr. Hall by individuals, subcontractors, and the Ruidoso State Bank totaling $112,681.59 for failure to pay for completed contracted services.
• Mr. Hall was sued multiple times from 1987-2009, including once for “Unpaid Labor,” twice for “Breech of Contract” and three times for “Debt and Money Due.”
Record as a State Legislator (all information available through records request at NM Legislative Library in Santa Fe)
Missed votes in the state legislature:
• In 5 of his 6 years as a Legislator, he missed over 10% of the votes cast every year except for 1988.
• In 1987 alone, he missed 20% of votes.
Conflict of interest votes:
• In 1989 Mr. Hall voted against HB 561. The bill included a provision that made misdemeanor and felony charges for contractors who accepted payment for construction and failed to pay owed money to suppliers.
• Mr. Hall also voted against the “Subcontractors Fair Practices Act” twice (1987- SB 598, 1988- SB 33) which set up common sense reforms for subcontractors on public projects.
Summary:
Ben Hall has a long record of financial irresponsibility, illustrated by the large number of liens placed on him for failure to pay his federal and state taxes, his employees, and subcontractors hired by his firm. Mr. Hall also voted on several bills despite a clear conflict of interest. Given the large number of corruption and ethics scandals that have recent plagued the Public Regulatory Commission, this is not the year to elect someone with such a clear history of questionable ethics and financial mismanagement.
Appendix – Liens and Lawsuits (All lien information ia public record and can be obtained at Lincoln County Clerk’s office in Carrizozo, NM)
Federal tax liens:
1 – April 24, 1998 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay income taxes (1040)
$10,136.25
2 – Oct 19, 1992 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay for payroll taxes
(940 and 941) $43,659.21
3 – Oct 19, 1992 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay for payroll taxes
(940 and 941) $29,814.21
4 – Aug 29, 1991 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay payroll taxes (940) $1,766.27
5 – Nov 4, 1986 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay for payroll taxes (940
and 941) $43,659.21 (same as Oct 19, 1992)
6 – Nov 4, 1986 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay for payroll taxes (940
and 941) $29,814.21 (same as Oct 19,1992)
7 – Nov 4th, 1986 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay for payroll taxes
(940 and 941) $8,668.67
8 – Apr 4, 1985 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay payroll taxes (940) $1,766.27
9 – May 14, 1984 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay payroll taxes (940
and 941) $21,230.25
10 – May 20, 1983 Federal Tax Lien for failure to pay payroll taxes (940
and 941) $24,494.40
State tax liens:
1 – Oct 7, 1983 State Tax Lien for $54,695.53
2- April 24, 1985 State Tax Lien for $59,111.74
3 – Dec 26, 1986 State Tax Levy for failure to pay unemployment taxes of $791.28
4 – Oct 11, 1989 State Tax Lien of $100,099.81
Other liens:
1 – Oct 27 2007 Attorney’s Lien for $25,000
2 – March 24, 2000 Lien for failure to pay for crane services and drilling
for construction of a Fire Station $1,050
3 – March 31, 1994 Lis Pendens for $88,000 filed
4 – Jun 16 1989 Lis Pendens for ???? filed by Ruidoso State Bank
5 – Oct 19,1986 Lis Pendens for ????? filed by Ruidoso State Bank
6 – Feb 26, 1986 Lien for failure to pay construction company for labor $10,079.01
7 – May 11, 1983 Four couples filed liens against Ben Hall for $12,073.04,
$7,976.01, $1,879.15, and $9,229.79.
Awards:
Aug 31, 1988 Ruidoso State Bank awarded $41,640.04 against Ben Hall
Apr 12, 1989 Judgment against Ben Hall of $3,754.55 to Valley Transit Mix
Other lawsuits (available through case lookup application at ww2.nmcourts.com/caselookup)”
Marshall Peebles v. Ben Hall for Debt and Money Due (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SD-1226-CV-200900296)
Sierra Bank v. Ben Hall for Debt and Money Due (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SD-1226-CV-9900218)
Simons, Evelyn v. T&P Investments et all for Breach of Contract (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SD-1226-CV-94000071)
Aquatic Pools Inco v. Hall, B for Breach of Contract (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SD-202-CV-9001342)
Melton and Puccini v. Hall, B for Debt and Money Due (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SD-202-CV-8707695)
Gunter and Bewley v. Hall in Ruidoso Magistrate court for $761.25 GC complaint (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SM-32-CV-9800144)
Sauerman v. Hall in Ruidoso Magistrate court for $3,316.00 in Unpaid Labor (http://www2.nmcourts.gov/caselookup/app?component=cnLink&page=SearchResults&service=direct&session=T&sp=SM-32-CV-990133)
Mesillorob, are you saying that only wealthy people should be able to hold elected office? Wow.
Here is “Silent” Ben Hall’s website. There is no clarification at all about the issues!!!
http://www.benhall.us/
There are absolutely no answers to the problems of the PRC except a few generalities.
You guys are all wet. McCamley is a nice guy but has never held a job that paid anything close to the $90k here. He is willing to promise whatever you want to hear in order to get elected. Point in case is his pledge to represent the little guy against the big utilities. He would have done much better to find out what the job was before he made such pledges. Simply put, he cannot perform.
At least Ben Hall has the presence of mind to keep “silent” on such pledges.
The bigger issues at the PRC surround the bloated budget, the politicization of the agency and the office and the cronysim that makes a mockery of good staff. Where is Bill on that? That is not ethics. As Ben Hall recognizes, it all boils down to Commissioners and their character. Empty campaign promises do not translate into character, they simply translate into greed.
“McCamley says choice is a reformer or more of the same”. Indeed? I would tend to agree with him, given his side of the story here if we are to believe this is all the truth there is to tell. But I would be curious to see if McCamley would see the races for Guv, SOS, AG, etc., where the entrenched machine, La Politica candidates are truthfully more of the same, to be the same clear choice.
The best debate and race for this office would have been between Mr. McCamley and Jamie Estrada. They both would have brought integrity and knowledge of the issues to the table.
The Republicans in this state have no shame. Ben Hall represents the corruption present in the Republican party that they are campaigning against and yet they are SILENT on this. What hypocrites!
Without doubt, Mr. McCamley is the better candidate. “Silent” Ben Hall does not even want to debate Mr. McCamley. I guess silence is golden to Mr. Hall!