Contact
Candidates complain about guv-supporting PAC
Gov. Susana Martinez
Eleanor Chavez, David Coss, Larry Martinez and Jack Sullivan allege that Reform New Mexico Now violated disclosure law; they also seek to publicly tie the PAC to the Republican governor after it got involved in their Democratic primary races.
Several legislative candidates have filed complaints against a Super PAC that is supportive of Gov. Susana Martinez’s agenda and has sent out mailers and aired radio ads in recent days attacking them or supporting their Democratic primary opponents.
The complaints from self-identified progressives Eleanor Chavez, David Coss, Larry Martinez and Jack Sullivan allege that Reform New Mexico Now violated state campaign disclosure law by not registering with the state within 10 days of receiving financial contributions and not filing a campaign finance report on May 14.
The complaints were sent Sunday to the secretary of state and attorney general. Read Chavez’s here, Coss’ here, Martinez’s here and Sullivan’s here.
The PAC responded by saying its initial finance report – filed earlier this week – erroneously reported that it received contributions in late April. It filed an amended report that states the contributions came on May 21 and 24.
“Reform New Mexico Now is in complete compliance with the law and, unlike other groups involved in these elections, we disclose all of our contributions and expenditures,” the group’s spokesman, Dominic Aragon, wrote in an e-mail.
He added that the Secretary of State’s Office “has informed us that we are in total compliance with the law” after filing the amended report, and said “any attempt to suggest otherwise is nothing more than election-eve desperation.”
The PAC hasn’t publicly released checks from the donors proving the dates of the contributions.
Highlighting PAC’s ties to guv
Based on the quotes the candidates provided in news releases, their complaints appear to be more about publicly tying the PAC before Tuesday’s election to the Republican governor – and energy companies that donated to the group and to Martinez – than they are about the timing of donations.
“It is outrageous that Susana Martinez would get involved in a Democratic primary, especially in northern Santa Fe County, and then try to hide her involvement from the voters,” Coss, who is running in the Democratic primary against Carl Trujillo for the open House District 46 seat, said. Reform N.M. Now sent a mailer this weekend urging voters to support Trujillo.
“The governor’s secret PAC, Reform New Mexico Now, has attacked my record twice in political mail that was sent to voters in Senate District 14,” Chavez said. “Democratic voters have a right to know who is behind these smear tactics, especially when they are sponsored by a Republican governor and other corporate interest groups.”
Chavez is running for the open state Senate District 14 seat against two other Democrats, Michael Padilla and James Taylor. The PAC didn’t back either of her opponents, but hit Chavez hard in this mailer and another NMPolitics.net has not obtained.
Eleanor Chavez
Larry Martinez, who is challenging incumbent Sen. John Arthur Smith, D-Deming, called a radio ad from the PAC “attacks from our Republican governor and her corporate interests” and “an attempt to fool voters and hold onto their influence in the Senate.”
“If Governor Martinez wants to support my opponent in this race, she should be transparent about it,” Larry Martinez said.
Sullivan, who is one of two Democrats challenging incumbent Sen. Phil Griego, D-San Jose, complained after the PAC sent a mailer backing Griego.
“Big Oil and Governor Martinez have a staked an interest in my defeat over incumbent Phil Griego, and that’s because I am not beholden to the corporations, oil and gas interests or the governor’s right-wing agenda,” Sullivan said.
David Coss
A noteworthy billing address
Whether contributions to the Super PAC came in April or May is important because the group – which isn’t subject to campaign contribution limits because it doesn’t coordinate with candidates – registered with the Secretary of State’s Office on May 29, according to documents provided by that office.
If the dates of the contributions listed in the amended report are accurate, the PAC registered within the 10 days required by law.
But more interesting to many is the billing address listed on the receipt for payment of Reform N.M. Now’s $50 registration fee. The PAC’s registration documents and finance reports list a P.O. box in Albuquerque as its address, and the group has refused to answer NMPolitics.net’s question about whether it has ties to Martinez.
But the billing address listed on the receipt is the same address used by the governor’s political action committee, Susana PAC, and the business run by her top political adviser, Jay McCleskey.
Larry Martinez
It’s not clear why that address is listed, since the receipt is a document created by the secretary of state, not the PAC. None of the documents filed by the PAC include that address. McCleskey and Aragon had no comment on the billing address, but Aragon said the group “will list all consultants and vendors on our finance reports as they are compensated.”
Helping Dems who support guv’s agenda
Regardless, NMPolitics.net has already reported that Reform N.M. Now’s biggest donors are Martinez supporters and its issues are Martinez’s issues. The PAC is clearly aiming to help Democrats who support Martinez’s agenda, or hurt those who don’t.
That’s perhaps also evidenced by the fact that Reform N.M. Now hasn’t gotten involved in two hot Senate primaries in which progressives are trying to unseat more conservative Democrats – the race between incumbent John Sapien and challenger Ben Rodefer, and the race between incumbent David Ulibarri and three primary opponents, including the progressive-backed Maxine Velasquez.
Jack Sullivan
The winner of the Sapien-Rodefer race will face the GOP’s David Doyle, and Republicans think they have a good shot at electing Doyle. They also think they have a good shot at electing Republican Vicki Perea over whoever wins the Democratic primary for the seat Ulibarri currently holds.
In other words, Reform N.M. Now appears to be helping Democrats it views as more supportive of Martinez’s agenda in their primary races only in contests in which a Republican isn’t as likely to win.
Trujillo responds
Meanwhile, Trujillo, Coss’ opponent, sent a statement saying his campaign has sometimes received support from organizations that “may have agendas that are likely to be at odds with our interests” – referring, in part, to Reform N.M. Now.
“And sometimes they may do things on their own, without our knowledge or our consent – whether it’s putting up a sign, sending out e-mails, making a financial contribution or something bigger,” he said.
“Unfortunately, the opposition has been using slimy tactics to insinuate that we are somehow connected to these organizations and that’s proof that we have some kind of secret, evil agenda,” he said. “Our agenda is not secret; it is clear. There is only one interest that I seek to serve, and that is the very special interests of the people in the community that I grew up in, that my family has lived in and raised our children in for 400 years – the people of District 46.”
This article has been updated to include a link to Chavez’s complaint.
19 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I have the same attitude towards cilantro and the novels of Robert Ludlum, J.
I don’t like any attack ads Mr. Schneider, they are all bad as far as I am concerned and show the lack of a reasonable argument against a candidate, since most are just petty, minor issues or half-truths. That is why it seems disingenuous to make distinctions between those paid for by Republicans against Democrats vs. ones paid for by Democrats against Democrats, what’s the difference?
I don’t like either, so why distinguish? Salsa with Ludlum novels is just as bad as salsa with cilantro, so when I go to a restaurant and there’s salsa and chips I always check carefully for little bits of Robert Ludlum novels in the salsa. They’re all the same, to me, because I don’t like either.
You got me there IP. Were many of the calls from out of state? That is what surprised me, DC area codes makes me wonder if this local election has operatives on the national scene, and how much money all that costs, unless some staffers of our Democratic contingent in DC are footing the bills for their staff to “volunteer”.
Dr. J:
I think I can top your repetitive Coss calls; the campaign of Karen Montoya (Bernalillo County Assessor, running for PRC) called me four times Sunday, but has also called me every single day for two weeks… after I had already voted – after which I’m rather glad that I hadn’t voted for her, since I would now be regretting it. However, her campaign is not the winner. The winner is Terry Fortenberry, running for House District 38 in Grant County, who robo-called me this evening to ask for my vote; I live in the 18th in Bernalillo County. I’m not even in the same area code as the 38th. One has to wonder how much money he wasted on that call…
“When the facts are on your side, pound the facts. When the law is on your side, pound the law. When neither is on you side, pound the table.” variously attributed
I have the solution to negative influences on elections; public support for moderate candidates; end the gridlock, vote for the moderate.
Everyone says they they want to end the gridlock, and then vote for the most intransigent, uncompromising, and inflexible sumbitch they can find. Go figure.
Not even 7 pm, and so far 4 calls from Coss’s campaign begging for votes. No, is something they do not understand it seems. Interesting thing is that only one area code was in 505, all others were 515 and 202, guess Coss is spending big bucks from the Santa Fe special interests on this.
I don’t like any attack ads Mr. Schneider, they are all bad as far as I am concerned and show the lack of a reasonable argument against a candidate, since most are just petty, minor issues or half-truths. That is why it seems disingenuous to make distinctions between those paid for by Republicans against Democrats vs. ones paid for by Democrats against Democrats, what’s the difference?
State Rep. Anna Crook, a prominent Republican, pretty much summed up Governor Martinez’s nasty tactics with her PAC actions when Ms. Crook wrote in a column for the Quay County Sun:
“First, let me be clear: I do not believe it is right for political party officers and elected officials to take sides in a contested primary.” Then, pointing at Spears’ camp, she said: “Over the last several weeks, the nastiness, misinformation, innuendo, slanderous mailings, robo calls and, in some cases, flat-out lies have created a toxic political environment the likes of which I have never seen before.”
Governor Martinez has viciously attacked fellow Republicans and supported Democrats. That is so wrong! Mr. Woods – did you notice this?
@Michael H Schneider where were the self proclaimed progressives who oppose Citizens United when Griego’s Super PAC was engaging in negative false attacks against a fellow Democrat? KRQE forced them to pull the commercial.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Znx6WdgU_YY
It is difficult for Democrats to speak out against a political action if they are not willing to stand up when they benefit. Michael, will you admit Progressive PAC has no place in a Democratic primary if they are using false information for negative attacks? If not, you should stop writing.
Governor Martinez is a total hypocrite. Her thinly disguised PAC “Deform New Mexico” – sorry “Reform New Mexico” gives to Democrats then she criticizes Pat Woods for once giving to Democrats. I suppose Ms. Angie Spears is getting money too. Ms. Spears’ only campaign issue was Pat Woods gave a Democrat money.
A metaphor can also be name calling, J.
And comparing these far left wing liberals to whining children is a metaphor.
Had you been comparing, that’d have been a simile. As it is, you were saying that one thing was another, so it was indeed a metaphor. http://knowgramming.com/metaphors/metaphor_and_simile_difference.htm
You’re missing the point (or being deliberately evasive) again: name calling and ad hominem argument can be done by metaphor, of course. If I were to say that you were the Joseph Goebbels of republican talking points, that’d be name calling. It’d also be a metaphor (and a Godwin violation).
attacking a particular candidate, one against Trujillo, one against Coss, neither was promoting any candidate
Attacking one candidate isn’t taking a position? That’s a remarkable assertion. Attacking one candidate isn’t promoting the other candidate? That’s even more remarkable.
no one has sued them for slander (and with all the trial lawyers beholden to the Democrat, so I assume both attacks are true,
I’m sorry that you’re ignorant of the laws of defamation, too, J. merely being false is insufficient to impose liability when talking about a public figure (see Times v Sullivan). So even had there been a suit, and had the suit failed, it’d be incorrect to conclude that the allegations were true.
Let me see if an example will clarify why your prior comment was wrong, and why you are drawing a false equivalence.
Let’s say I (a progressive registered Democrat) incorporate a SuperPAC called Americans For Decency and Tax Fairness, and contribute $1 million. Assume that there are two candidates for the Republican nomination for CD1 – Janice Arnold-Jones and Dan Lewis.
Assume that I spend that million dollars buying ads and sending clyers saying that Arnold-Jones is really a liberal, that she’s not family friendly, that she doesn’t believe in balancing the budget, and that true conservatives should oppose her. Let’s assume that I’m doing this because I think that a Repulican is certain to get elected, and that I believe that Dan Lewis’s positions are closer to mine – a liberal Democrat – than Arnold-Jones’s.
Do you see that some people might think I was being just a tiny bit deceitful?
Oops, sorry messed that up, it should be:
The flyers I got, both from different outside the district PACs, we not taking any position on the Democratic Primary. They were just attacking a particular candidate, one against Trujillo, one against Coss, neither was promoting any candidate. That is not deception, it is a personal attack on a candidate. It may be lying about each candidate, hard to tell, I don’t know either very well and no one has sued them for slander (and with all the trial lawyers beholden to the Democrat’s political machine I would think they would be involved unless true), so I assume both attacks are true, even if personal. And comparing these far left wing liberals to whining children is a metaphor. In case you don’t know what that is. here is the definition :
“A figure of speech in which an implied comparison is made between two unlike things that actually have something in common.”
The flyers I got, both from different outside the district PACs, we not taking any position on the Democratic Primary. They were just attacking a particular candidate, one against Trujillo, one against Coss, neither was promoting any candidate. That is not deception, it is a personal attack on a candidate. It may be lying about each candidate, hard to tell, I don’t know either very well and no one has sued them for slander (and with all the trial lawyers beholden to the Democrat, so I assume both attacks are true, even if personal. And comparing these far left wing liberals to whining children is a metaphor. In case you don’t know what that is. here is the definition ’s political machine :”
A figure of speech in which an implied comparison is made between two unlike things that actually have something in common.”
justaUNMstudent
June 4, 2012 • 9:00 am:
You might take into consideration that the checks that were solicited were written on a specific date and they could of been held until the proper paper work was in place before deposit. For this reason I think the checks or wire transfers dates would be important to determine if the intent was rightfully or wrongfully applied. It also would be nice to see the bank statements.
I want to see the bank deposits not checks. In my mind, the only way to truly prove you are in compliance is to release the bank statements show when the checks were deposited.
False equivalence, J, because you’re ignoring the dishonesty on one side.
Yes, typical left wing hypocrisy and status quo for NM’s corrupt political system. What a bunch of whining children we have here, grow up.
The problem is that Reform New Mexico is deceiving people (apparently). That it it taking a position in the democratic primary, purporting to be on behalf of democrats, when in fact (allegedly) it is a false flag effort of republicans.
That’s what people who are sensitive to ethics call “lying”.
On the other hand, the progressive PACs are calling themselves progressive PACs and are supporting progressive candidates.
That’s what people who are sensitive to ethics call “telling the truth”.
What a bunch of whining children we have here, grow up.
That’s what people who are familiar with logic and rhetoric call “name calling” (or argumentum ad hominem) – a well known fallacy. As someone who did graduate work in economics and who co-authored papers on ice cores, you should be familiar with this fallacy. (And that’s what’s called a Tu Quoque variant of the ad hominem, for those keeping score of rhetoric at home)
So the far left wing liberals cry foul if any PAC goes against them, while accepting any PAC’s contributions to their campaign against their rivals. Yes, typical left wing hypocrisy and status quo for NM’s corrupt political system. What a bunch of whining children we have here, grow up.
“If the dates of the contributions listed in the amended report are accurate”
A copy of the contribution check or wire transfer showing the date of the transaction should answer the question.
“But the billing address listed on the receipt is the same address used by the governor’s political action committee, Susana PAC, and the business run by her top political adviser, Jay McCleskey.”
You’re getting sloppy people…too much sloppiness loses elections…you’re really moving the Guv into the danger zone for her own re-elect…stand down quick…or risk losing the real prize…
Claiming personhood for corporations is an act of evil.