4-4 New Deal 75th

WED, 4-04-07

SANTA FE -- This month begins a year-long celebration of the 75th anniversary of the New Deal. Even if you aren't old enough to have been around 75 years ago, you've probably heard something about the New Deal.
These were the federal programs instituted after the election of President Franklin Roosevelt in 1933. The nation had been in the throes of the Great Depression for over three years. Roosevelt promised to lead us out of the economic crisis, if elected.
He began immediately after his inauguration in March, 1933, with a series of 15 major pieces of legislation passed by Congress during the famous "First Hundred Days" of the Roosevelt Administration.
That phrase has been copied, paraphrased and misused many times since 1933, most recently with U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's "First 100 Hours" initiative at the beginning of the 2007 Congress.
It was a pretty amazing feat for Roosevelt, but the nation was desperate. Government suddenly became the solution to our problems. It worked well enough that big government remains a major part of our lives 75 years later.
And it didn't stop after 100 days. New programs kept coming to aid farmers, industry, banks, laborers, poor families, rural families, the elderly, artists, public health, conservation, recreation and public education.
Thousands of public buildings constructed during that era still stand throughout our nation. And many of them are decorated with murals, sculptures and paintings. After all these years, the fascinating origins of many of those buildings and pieces of art have been forgotten.
One of the goals of the organizations and agencies promoting this 75th anniversary commemoration is the identification and highlighting of the New Deal's many contributions to the nation's well-being and prosperity.
New Mexico has had a head start in the awareness of the New Deal in our state. Our state's art community had begun springing up during the Roaring '20s. With the Depression of the '30s, the market for anything but bare essentials dried up.
New Mexico's artists were put to work decorating courthouses, schools, state and federal buildings, city halls and parks. As some of those building lay decaying and their art forgotten, a project was started about a decade ago to identify, catalogue and publicize their works.
Chief mover in the project was Kathy Flynn, who worked New Deal art into Blue Books for two secretaries of state and then helped form the National New Deal Preservation Association, which she now serves as executive director.
That organization is leading the 75th anniversary effort in conjunction with agencies such as the National Park Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Postal Service. Also participating are organizations honoring Franklin Roosevelt, state rural electric associations, and state humanities councils.
In New Mexico, a traveling photography exhibit is being prepared featuring our New Deal sites and treasures. The 13 towns participating in the state's Mainstreet program will feature their New Deal treasures. And the New Mexico Museum of Indian Arts and Culture plans three-day symposia on New Deal Native American accomplishments.
Flynn reports that a surprising number of New Mexico alums of New Deal programs, such as the Civilian Conservation Corps, are active in the state and will be involved in commemoration activities.
Of course, everyone is invited to participate. If you are interested, you can contact Flynn at P.O. Box 602, Santa Fe 87504. Call her at (505) 473-3985 or e-mail her at newdeal@cybermesa.com.

 

4-2 Its the Performance Stupid

MON, 4-02-07

SANTA FE -- Perhaps I missed it, but I haven't heard any of the expert talking heads on TV analyze problems associated with dismissing those U.S. attorneys for performance reasons.
There is no reason a U.S. attorney can't be dismissed for poor performance, but there is a proper way to do it in order to avoid controversy. Apparently none of the attorneys were told they were performing poorly. They all say they received positive job evaluations right up to the time they were dismissed.
It would seem obvious anyone could figure out that telling employees they are doing fine and then firing them for not doing fine reflects more negatively on the boss than the employee.
All but the top government employees at the federal, state and most local government levels are covered by a civil service system that requires evaluations spell out any shortcomings and suggest methods of correcting them.
Top officials are appointed to their jobs by chief executive officers and can be fired as quickly as they were appointed. But those firings usually are accomplished with a velvet hammer that allows the employee to resign for health, personal reasons, to spend more time with family or pursue other interests.
As New Mexico U.S. Attorney David Iglesias put it, he knew he was hired for political reasons and he'd have had no complaints about being fired for political reasons because that's part of the game. But to be fired for performance reasons, with no warning is devastating to one's professional career.
Evidently there is some sort of expectation that the Department of Justice will operate independently of the White House, while the remainder of the federal government operates completely under the president's control. While that sounds magnificent in theory, it seems impossible in reality. I find it difficult to be too surprised at what is happening in the current situation.
President Richard Nixon's attorney general played the party line for his president, even when Nixon got in trouble. The only attorney general I can remember who acted somewhat independently was Janet Reno with her appointment of Ken Starr to prosecute President. Bill Clinton.
Maybe there is an argument to be made for changing our constitution to call for an elected U.S. attorney general similar to what New Mexico has. I could go for that, but I feel quite certain it won't happen.
If the current situation continues to drag out, as it most certainly is bound to do, my guess is that the president will prevail unless there is something written hard and fast into some law making the Justice Department different when it comes to the president's right to do what he wants with his appointees.
How could the Justice Department have implemented the firings without stirring up all the controversy? One way would have been to fire one at a time. Each attorney would then have had to stand alone, which likely none would have wanted to do.
Another solution would have been to not rehire them at the beginning of President Bush's second administration two years ago. That is a standard time to make changes. Eight attorneys could have been canned at that time with little fuss.
But word has it that some in the White House wanted to dump all 93 U.S. attorneys at once. At least someone nixed that bad idea. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales takes credit for that decision. But it seems to have been his last sensible decision on the matter.
Even claiming political reasons for firing eight attorneys in the middle of the president's term would have been better that saying that seven of them were for performance reasons. It was the word "performance" that got the former U.S. attorneys to talking publicly, attempting to salvage their law careers.
Any number of artfully worded reasons between "politics" and "performance" would have kept this gang that couldn't shoot straight off the hook.

 

3-31 Following Fred

Sat, 3-31-07

IN THE CARIBBEAN -- Exactly 20 years ago, Fred McCaffrey, the author of this column during the 10 years prior to me, took a trip to Central America and the Caribbean to find his dream retirement spot.
Fred and his new wife, Jan Lynch, settled on the beautiful island of Montserrat, a volcanic island located in the Lesser Antilles, a chain of islands forming the eastern edge the Caribbean.
Fred had gone through the many years of training to become a Jesuit but left before taking his final vows. He told his buddies he couldn't give up women. That may not have been the story he told everyone.
Because of his Jesuit training, Fred landed a job with the bishop of the Caribbean heading a school on Montserrat. It sounded like a good idea but the locals weren't sure they wanted an American curmudgeon, which is what Fred called himself, telling them what to do. Maybe it's because we columnists tend to think we know just about everything.
So Fred moved on. Soon he was writing political commentary for one of the two newspapers on the island. As in many small nations, one newspaper strongly supports the government while the other is the mouthpiece for the loyal opposition.
Unfortunately, Fred was working for the minority party's paper. The night before his 90-day visa was to be renewed, four big guys showed up at Fred's door to inform him that he was to be off the island before the sun set again.
Now, that's immigration enforcement. Oh, that we could do that here. Nothing more was heard from Fred. I was sending him $350 a month for six years as compensation for the column and I figured he needed the money but I wasn't going to send it to an address that no longer appeared to be good.
A call to Joan Murphy in Sen. Pete Domenici's Santa Fe office got the State Department on Fred's trail. Several days later they called to say Fred had been located on the island of St. Kitts, not far north.
Fred got along fine there, managing to stay out of trouble. But just as his friends in Santa Fe had figured, Fred didn't last long in paradise. Soon, he was back home enjoying the action of New Mexico politics and a little more freedom of the press.
Perhaps Fred had a guardian angel. Less than a year after his quick departure from Montserrat, the island was devastated by Hurricane Hugo. Ninety percent of the property on the island was damaged and there were many deaths.
Then in 1995, the volcano at the north end of the island erupted, sending residents to the less-populated south end. That was fortunate, because two years later, a pyroplastic blast buried the capital city of Plymouth in 40 feet of mud. The only deaths were those who refused an evacuation order. Fred was the type to do that, had he developed a liking to the place.
The island is slowly being rebuilt, although the mountain continues to spew an inch of ash a day and future major eruptions are predicted.
I couldn't resist a helicopter ride from neighboring Antigua to see the status of Fred's former paradise. We'll also visit St. Kitts later this week. I've been thinking a lot about the dear departed Fred recently.
I've been writing this column much longer than any of its previous authors. Fred bought it from Bob Huber, who wrote it only a couple of years, toward the end with Carroll Cagle. Huber bought it from Fred Buckles, who wrote it for a good 10 years.
Buckles bought it from the widow of its creator Will Harrison, who started it as the editor of the Santa Fe New Mexican. After being fired, Harrison syndicated the column in many New Mexico papers, beginning with the Albuquerque Tribune.
Much has happened in my life recently. Dreams of paradise may be getting closer.

 

3-14 Get Centerrial On Track

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE � Lest you get the notion that New Mexico is becoming less the Land of Manana as progress parches on, think again.
New Mexico has the longest and most varied history of any state in the nation, but when it comes to celebrating that history, we become more complacent every year.
The latest example is the state Legislature's disinterest in beginning preparations for our state's centennial celebration in 1912. After the longest battle of any state to enter the union, it finally happened on January 6, 1912.
Sure, that's almost 5 years away, but centennials usually start a year early and involve a tremendous amount of bureaucracy and planning. Arizona's centennial is a month later, but it started planning two years ago with a $2.5 million legislative appropriation.
Rep. Rhonda King of Santa Fe has introduced House Bill 511 providing $250,000 to create a Centennial Commission and spelling out eight pages of powers and duties. It is a comprehensive piece of legislation, providing a good road map for how we get organized.
So far, the bill has made it through a grand total of one committee and now lies in the House Appropriations Committee with no money in it. Legislative fiscal wizards fret that similar appropriations may be required during the next five years and they might have more important projects than honoring our state.
Let it be noted that the state has been running surpluses of close to a billion dollars the past few years and that if $250,000 were appropriated for each of the next five years, it would only be half the amount Arizona already appropriated two years ago.
It might also be noted that the first 250 years of Arizona's history is New Mexico history. Arizona was merely the western half of New Mexico from 1598 to 1848. And there wasn't much in that half of our state other than saguaros and scorpions.
It is disheartening to see such disinterest in honoring our great state. We will miss a great opportunity to promote our state to the rest of the nation. Guess we can hope that some people will drop by on their way to Arizona. Steve Terrell of the Santa Fe New Mexican predicts New Mexico's centennial celebration will be a pot-luck dinner and no-host bar.
It hasn't always been that way in New Mexico. Back in 1883, we threw a party that surely will never be equaled in our state. We called it a Tertio-Millennial Celebration.
Somehow 333 years didn't quite compute, but it was catchy and the railroads which just recently had reached out state were anxious to pay the bill in order to bring tourists from all over the nation to get a taste of the true West.
It was a smashing success. The length of the Tertio-Millennial kept being extended as trainloads of visitors poured in for weeks. The press came, too, from all over the nation. Indians danced. A race track was built two blocks north of the plaza and the huge center was filled with booths. The area now is Federal Place.
Another huge celebration occurred in 1940, the 400th anniversary of Coronado's expedition. It likely was New Mexico's second biggest celebration. In 1960. Santa Fe celebrated long and hard for its 350th anniversary.
And for nearly 300 years Santa Fe and the Catholic Church have celebrated an annual fiesta commemorating the reconquest of New Mexico in 1692.
But recent celebrations have fallen rather flat. The pueblos did a fairly good job of commemorating the 300th anniversary of their 1680 Revolt against Spanish settlers. And Albuquerque put on a year-long 300th birthday bash last year.
Very little happened, however, in 1992 to celebrate Columbus's encounter with the New World. Absolutely nothing took place in 1996 on the 150th anniversary of New Mexico becoming part of the United States.
And little happened in 1998 to commemorate the 400th anniversary of the first permanent European settlement in what is now the United States.
All of those had overtones of strife. This one doesn't. It's our chance to do it right.
WED, 3-14-07

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

3-12 What Are They Trying to Hide?

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- Governmental transparency took a step backward last week when the Senate passed a bill removing the requirement for electronic filing of campaign expense reports.
The excuse was that some legislators aren't smart enough to figure out how to do it. The measure was sponsored by Senate majority leader Michael Sanchez, who claims he is one of those dummies.
Besides being the Senate's leader, Sanchez also is a trial lawyer. One would think that a person with those accomplishments would be able to muster the resources to help him file his report even if he is technologically challenged.
I can understand being mystified about computers. But I can learn enough to do research on the Internet and electronically transmit my columns to newspapers. One would hope our lawmakers would be smart enough to do what their positions require, or at least find someone to help them.
Why get so upset about campaign expense reports not being filed electronically? Well, we also have had a technologically challenged secretary of state the past eight years. Rebecca Vigil-Giron's office found it extremely difficult to transfer hard-copy campaign expense reports onto the office's Web site.
That means the only way of learning before an election who is contributing to candidates for public office is to go to the secretary of state's office and digging through files. Mr. and Ms. New Mexico aren't able to do that. But they could if the reports were on the Internet.
Last week, I told you how Senate leaders of both parties seem determined to block any attempts to open up the legislative process to fuller public scrutiny.
The ethics legislation, developed over the past year by a blue-ribbon committee appears doomed in the Senate. So does legislation to open conference committee meeting between House and Senate representatives to iron out differences in measures passed by their respective houses.
And then, there is the televising of legislative session, which passed the Legislature last year but which still hasn't been implemented. Inside sources tell me the problem is that they are trying to show the public the least they possibly can without being accused of hiding something.
Legislative leaders usually blame open government proposals on the press. They contend we want to get the information so we can distort it to fit our own agendas. But if that information can be televised and put on state government Web sites, the public can view it directly without being filtered by our devious minds.
About all we can hope for is that Senate leaders will have a glorious epiphany between now and the March 17 final day of the session. There's not much time left.
Now here's some good news for the tens of thousands of New Mexicans who have had their lives or businesses adversely affected by the state's new SHARE computer system. Lawmakers are taking some initial steps toward finding out what is wrong and fixing it.
A measure is moving through the legislative process to provide $150,000 to the state auditor's office to determine what is not working with the $29 million system.
In addition, the Legislative Finance Committee, following our column last week on SHARE, has notified state officials responsible for the program to prepare for an LFC audit of their operation.
LFC Chairman Luciano "Lucky" Varela, of Santa Fe, notes that the committee spent six months calling state officials before it to answer many questions about the system's failures. Evidently the committee now has decided that the assurances it received were nothing more than empty promises.
In another bit of partially good news, a federal jury has decided that former intelligence adviser Scooter Libby is not beset by early-onset Oldtimers disease.
This can give us some confidence that our national defense is not in the hands of people with memory problems, just people who have trouble telling the truth.
MON, 3-12-07

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

3-7 Revised Iglesias

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- By the time you read this, we may know the answer to some of the following questions. Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias was invited by a U.S. Senate committee and subpoenaed by a U.S. House committee to testify yesterday on his firing.
What's up with the Iglesias ouster? The surprise dismissal of U.S. Attorney for New Mexico David Iglesias makes less sense all the time.
We wrote about the forced resignation of Iglesias last December, soon after it happened. We asked why Republicans would want to sacrifice one of their few rising political stars.
We've received no answers, only more questions as one U.S. attorney after another throughout the nation falls in front of someone's political firing squad.
U.S. attorneys are appointed by the U.S. Justice Department, usually upon the recommendation of a state's senior U.S. senator of the president's party. Suddenly, in this seventh year of the George W. Bush administration, eight U.S. attorneys have received their walking papers with no reason given.
Iglesias, along with his seven dismissed counterparts, figured they'd lost their jobs because of political maneuverings. Iglesias said he could handle that. People understand it's a political job.
But when the U.S. Senate's Judiciary Committee began seeing bipartisan reaction to so many firings, it called on the U.S. Attorney General's office to explain the situation.
Among other responsibilities, U.S. attorneys are on the front line of prosecuting terrorism offenses, such as immigration, narcotics and firearms violations. The panel wanted to know if these dismissals are affecting the administration's top priority of fighting the war on terror.
To the surprise of committee members, the deputy U.S. attorney general testified that only one dismissal was the result of politics. He told the panel that presidential adviser Karl Rove needed a job for an ex- staff member. He said the other seven axes fell because of performance issues.
That was the final straw for Iglesias. Citing an outstanding record for prosecuting terrorism cases, of which there are so many in a border state, Iglesias called his ouster nothing more than a "political fragging," according to blogster Joe Monahan.
"Fragging" is a military term referring to the attack from behind of a superior officer during battle. Iglesias would be very familiar with the term from his days as a judge advocate in the Navy. He so distinguished himself in that role that a character in the movie "A Few Good Men" was based on him.
Discharging someone based on performance is very serious business. It affects the remainder of a person's career. Performance so poor that it justifies dismissal as a U.S. attorney also likely wipes out a person's political career.
If Iglesias were to run for state attorney general again, don't you suspect his firing just might be noted by his opponents, whether in a primary or general election?
The poor performance charge against Iglesias may relate to the conviction of former state Treasurer Robert Vigil on only one count and the failure to have a case ready to go before last November's general election involving payoffs to Democrat officials in the construction of two courthouses in Albuquerque.
It may have been poor performance, but a good case can be made that the FBI overreached in preparing evidence for the cases just as it did in the national security prosecutions of Wen Ho Lee and David Hudak.
National news indicates that several of the other dismissed U.S. attorneys were preparing political corruption cases against Republican officials and that others disagreed with the Bush administration on high-profile issues such as immigration and capital punishment.
At a Feb. 28 news conference, Iglesias revealed that two members of Congress contacted him not long before the November election inquiring about his timetable in the case involving the Albuquerque courthouses.
What Republicans would be so interested in that? What Republicans would want to risk ruining his future political career? Potential opponents? Those who felt he wasn't playing the political game well enough as U.S. attorney?
Whatever the answer, those people may have wiped out one of their party's most promising future candidates.
WED, 3-07-07

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

Timing is everything. Wish I'd written this for today instead of Wednesday.

3-9 Lawmakers Unwilling to Become More Transparent

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- Does New Mexico have an open, transparent government? Comparisons with other states say we don't. But enough legislators think we do that attempts to further open government seem doomed to failure once more in the 2007 Legislature.
The issue is whether the public views elections as honest, interactions between lobbyists and public officials as above board and legislative deliberations as free from back room deal making.
Former GOP gubernatorial candidate John Dendahl left New Mexico declaring our state the most corrupt in the nation and its residents accepting of that behavior by electing the same candidates again and again.
That's probably overstating the case, considering recent developments in other states and at the federal level. But state lawmakers, mainly Senate leaders of both parties, are just as far off base in claiming no further light need be shed on their actions.
Attempts to make our government more open and transparent began in high gear as the 2007 Legislature commenced. Bills were introduced to implement recommendations from an ethics commission that labored for a year on a package of election reforms and limits on contributions and gifts from lobbyists.
Those measures moved quickly through the House but stalled in the Senate, which claimed a lack of time in last year's short session but changed its tune this year to claim no changes are needed.
When reminded of the scandal in the treasurer's office, Senate leaders countered that that was only one guy and they shouldn't be punished for his actions.
At this point, the ethics package is staggering in the Senate, weakened by body blows that have it on its last legs. Two Senate bills to open conference committees between the House and Senate to public view have died on the Senate floor. Two more bills headed over from the House seem destined to the same fate.
Last year, after previous tries, the Legislature agreed to televise its sessions, as most other states already do. But this year, there were no cameras. Legislative leaders explained that there are many technical problems to be worked out.
Somehow in the cradle of scientific technology, we suffer from severe handicaps. Legislative leaders say they may not even be able to have the system up and running by next year. What do they want to hide?
If it somehow is true that the treasurer's office is the only problem in state government that needs fixing, a constitutional amendment to make it appointive instead of elective would be very appropriate.
Gov. Bill Richardson's appointment of Doug Brown, a retired Albuquerque businessman to take over the post from elected treasurer Robert Vigil turned out to be a great move. Brown made improvements in the office that had been needed for years.
Actually, other down-ballot executive offices could stand to be eliminated. The oft-troubled Public Regulation Commission would be a great place to start. There's no big reason to have the state Land Office as an independent entity.
Good arguments can be made for having the attorney general and state auditor independent from the rest of state government. The bureau of elections and ethics administration functions of the secretary of state's office might best be separate from the rest of state government, but the other functions of the secretary of state's office might just as well be a part of state government.
For those concerned that this would consolidate too much power in the governor's office, please consider that we elect only one executive officer at the federal level. The president gets to appoint everyone.
People do like to elect as many public offices as possible. It gives us a little greater feeling of control over the system. But how many of those office holders do we really know?
We get to know the gubernatorial candidates fairly well. Somehow I would rather have the governor interview candidates for these now-elective positions and hold him responsible for their performance.
FRI, 3-09-07

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

 

3-7 Iglesias Ouster Still a Mystery

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- What's up with the Iglesias ouster? The surprise dismissal of U.S. Attorney for New Mexico David Iglesias makes less sense all the time.
We wrote about the forced resignation of Iglesias last December, soon after it happened. We asked why Republicans would want to sacrifice one of their few rising political stars.
We've received no answers, only more questions as one U.S. attorney after another throughout the nation falls in front of someone's political firing squad.
U.S. attorneys are appointed by the U.S. Justice Department, usually upon the recommendation of a state's senior U.S. senator of the president's party. Suddenly, in this seventh year of the George W. Bush administration, eight U.S. attorneys have received their walking papers with no reason given.
Iglesias, along with his seven dismissed counterparts, figured they'd lost their jobs because of political maneuverings. Iglesias said he could handle that. People understand it's a political job.
But when the U.S. Senate's Judiciary Committee began seeing bipartisan reaction to so many firings, it called on the U.S. Attorney General's office to explain the situation.
Among other responsibilities, U.S. attorneys are on the front line of prosecuting terrorism offenses, such as immigration, narcotics and firearms violations. The panel wanted to know if these dismissals are affecting the administration's top priority of fighting the war on terror.
To the surprise of committee members, the deputy U.S. attorney general testified that only one dismissal was the result of politics. He told the panel that presidential adviser Karl Rove needed a job for an ex- staff member. He said the other seven axes fell because of performance issues.
That was the final straw for Iglesias. Citing an outstanding record for prosecuting terrorism cases, of which there are so many in a border state, Iglesias called his ouster nothing more than a "political fragging," according to blogster Joe Monahan.
"Fragging" is a military term referring to the attack from behind of a superior officer during battle. Iglesias would be very familiar with the term from his days as a judge advocate in the Navy. He so distinguished himself in that role that a character in the movie "A Few Good Men" was based on him.
Discharging someone based on performance is very serious business. It affects the remainder of a person's career. Performance so poor that it justifies dismissal as a U.S. attorney also likely wipes out a person's political career.
If Iglesias were to run for state attorney general again, don't you suspect his firing just might be noted by his opponents, whether in a primary or general election?
The poor performance charge against Iglesias may relate to the conviction of former state Treasurer Robert Vigil on only one count and the failure to have a case ready to go before last November's general election involving payoffs to Democrat officials in the construction of two courthouses in Albuquerque.
It may have been poor performance, but a good case can be made that the FBI overreached in preparing evidence for the cases just as it did in the national security prosecutions of Wen Ho Lee and David Hudak.
National news indicates that several of the other dismissed U.S. attorneys were preparing political corruption cases against Republican officials and that others disagreed with the Bush administration on high-profile issues such as immigration and capital punishment.
At a Feb. 28 news conference, Iglesias revealed that two members of Congress contacted him not long before the November election inquiring about his timetable in the case involving the Albuquerque courthouses.
What Republicans would be so interested in that? What Republicans would want to risk ruining his future political career? Potential opponents? Those who felt he wasn't playing the political game well enough as U.S. attorney?
Whatever the answer, those people may have wiped out one of their party's most promising future candidates.
WED, 3-07-07

JAY MILLER, 3 La Tusa, Santa Fe, NM 87505
(ph) 982-2723, (fax) 984-0982, (e-mail) insidethecapitol@hotmail.com