Contact
Martinez heads down a slippery slope
Heath Haussamen
Though the secretary of state says it’s legal for Gov. Susana Martinez to blur the line between lobbying the Legislature and campaigning, the situation has me questioning whether Martinez’s actions match with her campaign rhetoric about ethical behavior.
Early in the current legislative session, Martinez started webcasting legislative committee hearings on her bills and using the video to promote her views. She angered many lawmakers by showing selective parts of some hearings and including commentary about how committee members voted.
Taxpayers paid for that lobbying. The webcasting is being done by the webmaster in the governor’s office. The video is being published on Martinez’s official government website.
But another aspect of Martinez’s lobbying effort was paid for with campaign dollars.
As part of her push to pass a bill that would repeal the law that allows undocumented immigrants to obtain driver’s licenses, Martinez ran radio ads urging people to call their lawmakers and tell them to stop blocking the bill.
A couple of nonprofits complained that such use of campaign money violates the state’s Campaign Reporting Act. Secretary of State Dianna Duran says the expense is legal. I’ve already written that the blurring of the line between campaigning and lobbying exposes a potential gray area in the law and may indicate the need to tighten language in the Campaign Reporting Act.
But there’s a more concerning aspect to Martinez’s using both taxpayer and campaign dollars for the same lobbying effort.
Campaigning with public dollars?
Martinez argued, in her letter to Duran justifying the radio ads, that she’s already in campaign mode – three months into her tenure and more than 3.5 years before the 2014 contest in which she’s up for re-election. Running radio ads that lobby the Legislature on a policy issue promotes her position on that issue and bolsters her image, she says.
Martinez is using public dollars on that very same lobbying effort with her webcasting. In addition, every time she holds a news conference or puts out a news release from her government office pushing a bill, she is, using her own logic, strengthening her image.
So, following her own logic, does that mean Martinez is campaigning with public dollars when she webcasts or puts out a news release with taxpayer money?
The reality is that Martinez is lobbying and campaigning at the same time. She’s using both taxpayer money and campaign cash to do it. There is, at best, only a technical separation between her campaigning and lobbying.
That’s evidenced in the statement Martinez makes time and again about bills she’s pushing. Though she clearly wants legislation passed, what she’s been urging lawmakers to do is give her bills and up-or-down vote.
There’s an implicit and political threat in urging an up-or-down vote: Pass my bills or get on the record as opposing them so I can use it against you in the next election.
No separation between lobbying and campaigning.
Openly blurring the line
A lack of separation between campaigning and governing is nothing new. For example, former Gov. Bill Richardson, former Lt. Gov. Diane Denish and others have appeared in TV ads promoting the work of state agencies and paid for by taxpayers.
There was no good reason for Denish to appear in taxpayer-funded ads about education, except that it increased her statewide name recognition and improved her image as she ran for governor. But the thinly veiled campaign ad doubled as a public service ad, so taxpayer dollars were used to fund it.
Perhaps sensing an ethical quandary, others have pretended they weren’t blurring the line between campaigning and doing the work of their government jobs.
What’s different in Martinez’s case is that, with her assertion that she’s campaigning when she urges the public to lobby the Legislature, Martinez is openly blurring the line.
On one hand, you could say Martinez is being more transparent by admitting what she’s doing. On the other hand, it’s concerning that she doesn’t appear to have any qualms about it.
Perhaps Martinez is just embracing the reality of how things work today, and being transparent about it instead of trying to mask it. But it doesn’t sit right with me.
Doing things differently?
The blurring of the line between campaigning and governing seems to me to be a slippery slope. When you can spend taxpayer and campaign dollars on the same lobbying effort, maybe you can also justify spending taxpayer dollars on other things that are more about re-election than they are about doing the public’s business.
Many blur this line. But didn’t Martinez promise to do things differently than Richardson and Denish?
11 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I’m not sure this is quite so controversial as you put it now, Heath, but voters, tired of all the Richardson antics and scandals, will be keeping a close eye on how Martinez conducts her office relative to credibility and ethics.
She isn’t the only one using campaign money to lobby. So is Andrew Cuomo, the governor of New York. Read this: http://www.economist.com/node/18231506?story_id=18231506&fsrc=rss
How about this; the Roundhouse is our house. There will be no meetings in our house that we cannot watch and record freely, except with our expressed permission. The terms of public service are the prerogative of the public and, not of public servants. We will decide what will and will not happen behind closed doors.
If politicians want to meet in secret without our permission, they can get the hell out of our house to do it.
Everything that happens either in committee or on the floor of the House or Senate should be open to the public to see and hear. How else can the prospect of their elected officials be held to account? Deals made behind closed doors or in secret meetings should be made unlawful and a crime against the people.
If we are to have transparency then we need complete transparency of all proceedings, in all instances. What can be so secretive at a state level as to have to hide the facts of those gatherings. We the people elected these bums and pay for their services through our taxes that they distribute, so we the people have a right to know and see what they are doing.
This is going to be one of those colossally bizarre moments where Mr. Gessing and I are going to be in agreement; after all, if the committees are so concerned about the Governor’s office only selectively broadcasting their meetings to meet her own goals, then clearly the way to counter that is to broadcast everything.
I think the Committees should take it upon themselves to offer video of ALL committee hearings. What are they trying to hide? The issue of whether Martinez is using this information to “campaign” against those who oppose her agenda is really irrelevant. What is relevant is that our so-called “representatives” in the Legislature refuse to let the people know what is going on in Committees on their behalf.
Heath, I think the biggest issue here is the fact that our new Governor is really much more concerned with politics than policy. The best example of this is the drivers liscense issue. If she makes good on her threat, and vetoes legislation that would strengthen the current policy, than that will reveal what her highest priority is. If she insists on being nothing other than a soundbite, so she can angle for 2012, than she deserves to be called the “Sarah Palin of the West.”
…just another ideologue who’s really not interested in meaningful leadership, just ideological politics of self promotion.
To settle the issue, file a Request for Declaratory Judgment and ask the New Mexico Supreme Court if the Gov.’s actions are within the Campaign Reporting Act. Whether the Supreme Court is right or wrong in their decision they are the ultimate authority over state law issues. If there remains a question, then file with the federal court. Settle the argument, don’t guess. Heath, I think your reporting is fair and directly represents the issues.
Heath I always enjoy your writting and the hard work you do to maintain a fair and balanced blog. I am not sure I am understanding the problem here and I mean that in all honesty? The Governor campaigned on a few issues and she is working to keep the people informed as to the progress on those issues. Why can’t the Governor tell the citizens of this state to call their legislators if they agree with her? Why can’t she film the committee meetings and post them on the state web site for all citizens to see?
Heath it seems to me the Governor has been very open about promoting an agenda and she is doing it in public. She isn’t getting some “non profit” or “special interest group” to push the issues she is doing it herself and I fail to see the problem with that. It seems to me this is exactly what we should ask for in government today honest and open discussion on issues that will allow the citizens to make educated decisions as time goes on.
You talk about “lobbying” yet what do her Legislative Aides and Chief of Staff do every day during the session? They are lobbying for legislation correct? Isn’t that what a Secretary is doing when they testify for or against a bill? I am confused on why it is wrong for the Governor to lobby and campaign at the same time? I beleive Gov. Martinez has done a great job of using state resources when she should and if there is any question at all about the actions she is taking using non tax dolars for these ads. She could have made a Public Service Announcement concerning these issues and ran it with tax dollars like the SOS, LT. Gov and Gov in the past? Instead Gov. Martinez choose to make sure she kept the campaigning away from her daily tasks as Governor and I for one think she should be praised for that.
It never fails. The campaign rhetoric and the actions never mesh. As for using the video taping of committee hearings like a FIXed news tool for distorting facts…why doesn’t that surprise me? It was only a question of time before the Carl Rove playbook of dirty tricks took root in this new Republican administration; being handled in large part by party wonks from inside the beltway. Once again the interests of the citizens of our State take a back seat to national party manipulation. Seems like there no courageous politicians of integrity anymore…in either party!
True character is tested less by the black and white choices we have to make, as by the light gray or darker gray ones.
Politicians and public servants, anyone who must be “trusted”, must hold themselves accountable to a higher standard of conduct than the law; the lowest commonly accepted standards of conduct.
Whatever ethical means; it means “legal” is not a high enough standard.
Commitment to higher standards of conduct must be manifest; you have to
walk the talk.
She shouldn’t have blurred the line, out of respect for the line.