Jon Barlea

The National Republican Congressional Committee has added Republican congressional candidate Jon Barela to ’contender’ status in its 2010 Young Guns program, a three-step program dedicated to electing open-seat and challenger GOP candidates nationwide.

“I’m proud of the work being done by our staff and volunteers, as we offer New Mexicans a clear alternative to the high-tax, high-spend status quo being offered by Martin Heinrich and Nancy Pelosi in Washington,” Barela said in a Monday news release. “I’m honored and excited to join the ‘Contender’ ranks in the NRCC Young Guns program.”

NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions said in a news release that Barela “has already proven that he will be a formidable candidate by meeting the Young Guns program’s rigorous goals and is well on his way to building a winning campaign that will put this seat back in the Republican column.”

“Jon is part of a strong and growing pool of candidates who are frustrated with the Democrat majority’s big-government ways and aren’t willing to stand by any longer,” Sessions said. “His campaign has put Martin Heinrich on notice that Americans are ready to turn the page on the failed experiment known as the Obama-Pelosi agenda.”

Former 2nd Congressional District Rep. Steve Pearce, who is trying to retake the seat from Democratic Rep. Harry Teague, was already  listed as a contender in the NRCC program.

‘There’s going to be a stark difference’

Last month, NMPolitics.net caught up with Barela at an Albuquerque Tea Party sponsored candidate “meet and greet” in Rio Rancho.

He told nearly 400 people who attended the event that “there is going to be a start difference” between him and incumbent Democrat U.S. Rep. Martin Heinrich.

In the NMPolitics.net video below, Barela says he’s running to “reclaim America.”

Click here to view the embedded video.

Peter St. Cyr, a contributing writer to this website and a 770KKOB Radio news reporter, recorded this video on January 16th in Rio Rancho, New Mexcio. He may be reached via email at peter.stcyr@gmail.com.

Pete Campos

It is clear to me and others that the state of New Mexico must both cut spending and raise taxes to balance the budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The only real question concerning tax increases is what principles we should follow to ensure that we maintain a sound tax policy.

It is well accepted that the four principles of sound tax policy are that tax laws should raise an adequate amount of revenue to fund government operations; that tax laws should not change taxpayer behavior; that the tax burden should be fair to taxpayers; and that tax laws should be simple, or at least as simple as tax laws can be.

It is important that we do our best to adhere to these principles as we consider the state’s current fiscal crisis and how best to solve it.

We know our tax policy is not raising an adequate amount of revenue. If it were, we would not be facing a revenue shortfall. So while we must and will cut state spending, we cannot cut it enough to cover the revenue shortfall. As we work on a tax increase package, we will work to make sure those increases do not distort consumer or business behavior, that they are fair and that they are simple.

Essentially, that means the tax increases we consider will raise only the money we need to fund important state services and be applied as broadly as possible.

There are several proposals that the Legislature is considering that fit that criteria.

One measure that has been endorsed by a Senate committee would reimpose the gross receipts tax on most food but would continue to exempt staples, such as meat, poultry, fish, bread, cereal, vegetables, fruits and dairy products. This measure, Senate Bill 10, is estimated to raise $170.5 million over the next two years for the state’s general fund. It also has the benefit of being applied broadly while continuing to benefit lower-income New Mexicans by exempting staple foods from the gross receipts tax.

Reforming our capital gains tax law to more fully tax that income would raise $33 million a year and restore a measure of progressivity to New Mexico’s tax policy by ensuring that wealthier New Mexicans pay taxes on more of their income.

Two measures already approved by the House of Representatives – House Bills 120 and 244 – would tighten our tax laws as they apply to certain corporations. Together, the measures are estimated to generate $26.6 million for the upcoming fiscal year.

There are other measures that may be worth considering. A small, temporary increase in the gross receipts tax – which is similar to a sales tax – is a broad-based tax because it is applied to nearly every purchase. It is simple to administer because it is merely added to the sales price; and, because it is small and temporary, it does little to change consumer behavior.

Such a proposal, recently approved by the House of Representatives, would add $426 million to the state’s general fund during the first two years of its four-year life.

Another proposal would raise for two years the top personal income tax rate that is paid by wealthier New Mexicans, from 4.9 percent to 6.4 percent, which is still well below the top rate that was in place before 2003. The higher rate would apply only to married couples with taxable incomes above $200,000 and single filers with taxable incomes above $133,000.

The proposals currently under consideration would raise millions of dollars for critical state programs without adversely affecting our economic recovery. The taxes would be applied fairly to most New Mexicans and would, at least temporarily, return a measure of progressivity to our personal income tax rates.

Campos is a Democratic state senator from Las Vegas and president of Luna Community College.

Photo by Kevin Steinhardt/flickr.com

Two pieces of legislation that would expand webcasting in the Senate have been awaiting – but not yet receiving – hearings in the Senate Rules Committee.

In fact, neither Senate Resolution 1, sponsored by Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, D-Belen, or Senate Resolution 4, sponsored by Eric Griego, D-Albuquerque, has yet to appear on the committee’s ongoing calendar – and two-thirds of the session has already passed.

In addition, a third piece of legislation that would expand webcasting – House Joint Memorial 15, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Steinborn, D-Las Cruces – passed the House today and is also headed for the Senate Rules Committee.

Griego, whose bill would expand audio and video webcasting to include Senate committee meetings held during sessions, said he hopes Rules Chair Linda Lopez, D-Albuquerque, schedules a hearing on his legislation soon.

Linda Lopez

“The public has a right to see how decisions are made up here. Webcasting committees in both houses is crucial to our transparency efforts,” Griego said. “I hope the Senate version of the bill is given a fair hearing soon.”

A resolution similar to Griego’s, also sponsored by Steinborn, passed the House earlier this month, and official webcasting of House committees has already begun.

Sanchez’s bill would expand video webcasting from the Senate floor to include multiple cameras instead of the one that’s currently used. And Steinborn’s joint memorial would expand webcasting to include interim committee meetings.

I sent Lopez a message to ask when the bills will be scheduled for hearings. You’ll know if I get a response.

U.S. Rep. Harry Teague during today's news conference at the Roundhouse. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

U.S. Rep. Harry Teague, D-N.M., had little to say today about his looming election battle against former Republican U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, saying he’s more focused on doing his job.

“I’ve been working on being a congressman, not campaigning,” Teague said in an interview at the Roundhouse in Santa Fe.

He said he’s been working hard for his constituents, traveling the 2nd Congressional District in Southern New Mexico that he represents and holding almost 100 public forums and meetings.

“As a congressman, you’re supposed to represent the people, and the way you do that is to talk to them and listen,” he said.

Teague was in Santa Fe to announce that he’s introduced federal legislation designed to encourage additional states to collect DNA from people arrested for felony crimes so it can be checked against DNA gathered from unsolved crimes.

Teague did say when he starts actively campaigning for re-election he’ll have to focus outside the population centers in the district – Las Cruces and Roswell – but also said Las Cruces is very important to the race because it has nearly a third of the district’s voters.

He said “hard” campaigning will begin in March or April.

“But the first thing we’re going to do is represent the people,” Teague said.

State Reps. Jeff Steinborn, Right, and Janice Arnold-Jones talking during today’s debate on the webcasting memorial. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

The House easily passed a memorial today that, if also approved by the Senate, will direct legislative staff to begin webcasting interim committee meetings held around the state.

The debate on House Joint Memorial 15, sponsored by Rep. Jeff Steinborn, D-Las Cruces, was mostly cordial. The memorial passed 65-2 with only Democratic Reps. Eliseo Lee Alcon and Andrew Barreras voting against it.

“I think it’s important, Mr. Speaker, because of course during the interim we develop our budgets, we develop policy,” Steinborn said during debate on the memorial.

Two amendments were added to Steinborn’s resolution before it was approved. The first, from Republican Rep. Janice Arnold-Jones, changed the wording of the resolution so that it would direct, rather than request, that Legislative Council Service begin webcasting. The second, from Majority Leader Ken Martinez, stripped wording in the bill that would have provided for archiving of video and audio taken during interim committee meetings.

Martinez has consistently argued against archiving. New Mexico isn’t a state whose courts considers legislative intent in addition to the actual wording of legislation, so he has said it’s important to not create permanent records other than the actual legislation.

Steinborn accepted the amendment so the memorial would be consistent with House rules that don’t allow archiving of webcasting from the floor and regular committee meetings.

His memorial allows for the reality that webcasting won’t be possible in some rural areas where the necessary technology isn’t available. Some $35,000 has been included in the budget bill that already passed the House to purchase the equipment for webcasting.

Arnold-Jones, who Steinborn called the pioneer of webcasting in the Legislature, thanked him for taking it to the next level.

“I am just so pleased that you have taken this forward,” she said.

The memorial now heads to the Senate.

Jayann Sepich, the mother of slain NMSU student Katie Sepich, speaks today at a news conference in Santa Fe about the new legislation sponsored by U.S. Rep. Harry Teague. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Congressman announces legislation at the Roundhouse, where he and others promote the success of Katie’s Law in solving crimes in New Mexico

U.S. Rep. Harry Teague has introduced legislation that would encourage additional states to collect DNA from people arrested for felony crimes so it can be checked against DNA gathered from unsolved crimes.

The announcement that Teague, D-N.M., has introduced a federal version of New Mexico’s Katie’s Law came today at the Roundhouse in Santa Fe. He was joined at the news conference by Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, state legislators and others.

Since Katie’s Law was passed on a state level in New Mexico in 2006, it’s led to 101 successful convictions, Denish said. Some 6,500 felony arrestees have had their DNA entered into the state system, she said, adding that 125 other cases have been “directly aided” by the law.

“The statistics show that Katie’s Law works,” Denish said. “We’re putting away more criminals.”

The law is named for Katie Sepich, who was a 22-year-old graduate student at New Mexico State when she was murdered in Las Cruces in 2003. The crime wasn’t solved until after the state enacted the law mandating that those arrested for felonies have their DNA entered into a state system so it can be checked against DNA from other unsolved crimes.

Twenty-one states and the federal government already have laws that allow their law enforcement agencies to collect DNA from those arrested for felonies, and Teague said a federal law that pushes other states to do the same “could save countless lives.”

“This would allow law enforcement to treat DNA evidence left at the scene of the crime as they do fingerprints,” Teague said.

Financial incentives to states

Teague said his legislation would encourage other states to start collecting DNA by funding 10 percent of the cost of taking DNA samples.

Katie’s mother Jayann Sepich, speaking at the news conference, said such a system will save states money. Katie’s killer was arrested for a separate crime three months after murdering her, but her death wasn’t linked to the killer until 3.5 years later when New Mexico’s law was passed and the DNA could be matched.

In the meantime, law enforcement spent $200,000 investigating Katie’s murder, Jayann Sepich said.

She said the new statistics on how Katie’s law has helped lead to convictions – released today for the first time – prove that Katie’s Law is working.

“We’re so grateful that those monsters are being stopped,” she said.

Teague sounded optimistic about the legislation’s chances in Washington.

“I think the success we’ve had in New Mexico and other places will help us get it passed nationally,” he said.

Heath Haussamen

I’m betting that most other voters are like me: When they vote for a candidate for state representative, they expect that person to be present for important votes when possible.

Of course, a 30- or 60-day session of the New Mexico Legislature is a long time to be in the Roundhouse and away from home. Our lawmakers arrive at work early, stay late, and often come in on the weekends. And they’re not paid to do it.

So it makes sense that doctors’ appointments would cause lawmakers to miss votes sometimes. That’s life.

And that’s why I don’t find it egregious that two Republican state representatives missed a close vote Friday on whether to raise the gross receipts tax by a half cent. Both had doctors’ appointments and were out of town.

Two Democrats, however, missed the close, contentious vote even though they were in the Roundhouse at the time.

Here’s how it went down

To recap what I wrote previously, House Democrats had been meeting behind closed doors for days to debate the tax-hike proposal from Speaker Ben Lujan. The speaker knew it would be a close vote, and there was a lot of behind-the-scenes wrangling.

On Friday he called his bill up for a floor vote. Democratic Reps. Danice Picraux and Karen Giannini were absent, having been previously – and conveniently – excused.

You’d assume that means they were off taking care of some important personal business, right? They apparently weren’t. A search of the Roundhouse during a call of the House turned them up, and they were brought to the House floor.

An angry-looking Lujan got on the phone, and Giannini and Picraux quickly vanished again. The vote was taken without them and the two Republicans who were at doctors’ appointments, and Lujan’s bill passed 34-32.

The two Democratic representatives magically reappeared on the House floor moments later, after debate on the next bill had begun.

Call me an idealist…

I’m the kind of person who can stomach a vote on an important piece of legislation going either way – regardless of my personal opinion – as long as the bill passes or fails because members are voting based on what they believe to be right or what they believe their constituents want. Call me an idealist, but I believe that’s exactly what the U.S. and state constitutions intend.

In this instance, with two Republican members missing for valid reasons, an important piece of legislation passed by two votes while two Democrats were ostensibly hiding out somewhere in the Roundhouse to avoid voting.

For all we know they would have voted no and, together, had the power to kill Lujan’s bill by making it a tie vote, so the speaker successfully pressured them to take a walk.

I called both women on their cell phones shortly after the vote on Friday. Neither answered or returned my messages. Giannini made two appearances on the New Mexico Independent’s liveblog later that day, and both times I asked her to talk about the situation.

She vanished from the liveblog both times without another word.

For shame

I realize it’s difficult to stand up to the speaker. He’s the second most powerful official in state government and a master of behind-the-scenes politics. And he doesn’t really care if things play out in full view of the public. What happened Friday was so obvious to many who were watching, but he unashamedly made it happen anyway.

Such people remain in power and acting like bullies unless the members who give them those positions of authority refuse to allow it. I’m pretty sure most of Picraux’s and Giannini’s constituents wanted them on the floor for the vote on Lujan’s bill regardless of whether Lujan wanted them to be present.

Instead of standing up for the people they’re elected to serve, Picraux and Giannini apparently bowed to the will of the speaker.

Shame on them.

Haussamen bio │ Commentary archives │ Feed

Martin Heinrich

U.S. Rep. Martin Heinrich says grants awarded to technology companies in New Mexico will boost employment, especially in the renewable energy industry.

Heinrich talked to NMPolitics.net last week after meeting with officials at Albuquerque’s Ktech Corp. Inc. That company, which has developed energy storage technologies for a smarter, more efficient electrical grid, has just won a grant from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

Click here to view the embedded video.

Heinrich said in the long run the renewable energy industry in New Mexico will lead to a reduction in pollution and dependency on foreign oil.

Heinrich also said he supports state Rep. Brian Egolf’s legislation to move the state’s money out of Wall Street Banks and into New Mexico’s community banks because of their ability to quickly loan money to small business and homeowners.

Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

The majority of those who voted in last week’s non-scientific poll on this site said they do not approve of the job Michael Sanchez is doing as majority leader in the state Senate.

Of 241 voters, 138, or 57 percent, said they do not approve of the job Sanchez is doing, while 94, or 39 percent, said they do approve. Nine, or 4 percent, said they don’t know whether they approve.

Don’t forget to vote in this week’s poll, located at the top of the left column on the home page.

Lt. Gov. Diane Denish (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

Lujan calls lieutenant governor’s opposition “unexpected and unfortunate”

After the House narrowly approved a temporary, half-cent hike in the state’s gross receipts tax on Friday, Lt. Gov. Diane Denish said she’ll vote against the “harmful tax” in the event of a tie vote in the Senate.

“During these tough economic times, the last thing New Mexico families need is a tax increase on all of their purchases, and I won’t support it,” Denish said in a news release. “Instead of trying to balance the budget on the backs of New Mexico’s most vulnerable families, legislators need to get serious about reforming state government.”

“If a tie-breaking vote is needed in the Senate, I will swiftly vote against this unfair tax on everyday New Mexicans,” she said.

Denish didn’t provide an alternative to the tax hike in her news release. House Speaker Ben Lujan, the sponsor of the legislation, was quick to complain about her stating opposition after the fact rather than providing alternatives during the House debate.

“The House has worked hard to send to the Senate a budget plan with revenue enhancements to support a responsible fiscal budget that minimizes additional cuts to education, health and essential services,” Lujan said in his own news release. “It is unfortunate that the lieutenant governor opposes the courageous action taken by the House with support from education, health and labor advocates.”

House Speaker Ben Lujan during Friday's debate on the bill. (Photo by Heath Haussamen)

“It would have been helpful during our discourse if she would have shared her ideas on how to keep education whole and provide the necessary resources to match federal dollars for Medicaid,” Lujan said.

The speaker called the opposition from Denish, his party’s candidate for governor, “unexpected and unfortunate.”

“None of us take pleasure in imposing additional taxes, but the reality is that there are glaring needs we must address, and the majority felt this was unfortunately one of the few choices we had without imposing additional cuts,” Lujan said. “As to (Denish’s) vote in the event of a tie, her comment is not only premature, but totally unnecessary.”

The contentious tax proposal passed the House on a vote of 34-32 on Friday, but only after a lot of drama that included two Democratic members who were excused from the debate briefly appearing after a call of the House was issued and then vanishing again – only to return yet again after the final vote was taken.

In addition, two Republican members missed deliberations on the bill. Had they been present and voted against the bill, it would have died on a tie vote.

Update, 9 p.m.

Denish spokesman James Hallinan released this follow-up statement:

“Lt. Gov. Denish has shared her ideas on how we can reform government to save millions – and she believes cost-cutting reforms must come before considering any tax increases on New Mexico’s middle-class, working families like this gross-receipts tax,” he said.

I assume the ideas Hallinan is referring to are these proposals Denish made to cut some fat out of government. I asked in an e-mail to Hallinan what else Denish is proposing to balance the budget, since the ideas she’s laid out don’t appear to go far enough. I’ll let you know if I get an answer.

Update, 9:40 p.m.

Here’s Hallinan’s response:

“The lieutenant governor has been clear from day one that before any tax increases are considered, legislators must do everything possible to cut waste and make government more efficient – such as ending double-dipping, cutting political appointees, downsizing the state’s car fleet, sweeping non-reverting cash balances and reforming the capital outlay process. When you consider that many of these cost-saving reform measures haven’t even been debated, it’s simply unfair to ask middle-class New Mexicans to pay more taxes.

“If legislators make every cost-saving reform possible and they determine that revenue increases are still needed, those increases should be targeted – like eliminating corporate loopholes – not across-the-board tax hikes that hurt middle-class New Mexico families. But right now the focus should remain on how government can do more with less and be more cost-efficient.”