4-1 100 Days a Disservice

WED, 4-01-09


SANTA FE - President Barack Obama is nearing the three-quarters mark of his first hundred days in office. Every major news source is eagerly keeping tabs - political pundits, 24-hour news networks and interest groups of all stripes.
The countdown idea isn't Obama's although some of his spokespeople seem to be inadvertently going along with it. The president would just as soon not have the clock ticking so fast by imposing an artificial yardstick.
Obama is known as a man on the move and some contend he is moving too fast. But the new president says he'd like to take the time to do it right. He says a thousand days might be more like it.
President John F. Kennedy railed against any exaggerated expectations about getting his New Frontier in place quickly, saying it wouldn't be in 100 days, it might not be in 1,000 days or even in the lifetime of anyone on this planet.
President Franklin Roosevelt is credited with originating the concept of the 100-day timetable but my chief historian, Dave Clary, of Roswell, claims that's not correct. Roosevelt, he admits, was in a hurry to get his economic recovery programs in gear and faced numerous delays.
Presidents weren't inaugurated back then until March and Congress sometimes didn't get rolling until December. So as soon as Roosevelt took office, he asked Congress to come in early for a 100-day session to approve his recovery initiatives. That's the 100 days people talk about but they weren't really Roosevelt's first 100 days.
Many wanted Obama's first 100 days to begin the day after his election. But, like Roosevelt, Obama knew it would be unwise to step on the toes of the previous administration by having more than one president at a time.
Clary says a much earlier use of "the hundred days" in history refers to the second reign of Napoleon Bonaparte in 1815. It began with his escape from exile in Elba. It ended with his defeat at Waterloo and permanent exile in St. Helena, a windswept island in the South Atlantic. It all happened in 100 days.
I don't remember when the first 100 days of a president's term began evoking references back to Roosevelt. The term is unlikely to have been used at the beginning of Roosevelt's next three administrations. President Harry Truman's first 100 days weren't measured. We were much more interested at the time in ending World War II.
That takes us up to the 1953 beginning of President Dwight Eisenhower's administration 20 years after Roosevelt began the job. I don't remember it being used then. Jack Kennedy used it at the beginning of his administration but only in a disparaging manner.
My guess is that counting down the first 100 days of a presidency began with the advent of 24-hour news channels, which needed all the material they could get.
The practice hasn't really been good for the nation or its presidents. It has created unrealistic expectations and hasty efforts to accomplish them. Now, all brands of special interest groups have adopted the 100-day timetable for the new president to accomplish their own goals.
Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton added to the rushed expectations during her 2008 campaign by speaking to a 100-day timetable for what she would accomplish during the early days of her administration.
Whether he had anything to do with the rebirth of the 100-days mania, former Congressman Newt Gingrich definitely increased its usage. An avid student of history, Gingrich used the timetable in his Contract With America, which helped wrest control of both houses of Congress from the Democratic Party in 1994.
That count-the-days syndrome then extended to the Democratic take-back of Congress in 2006. So we've now extended to Congress the same expectations of turning around the ship quickly.

---

Internet Explorer 8 – Get your Hotmail Accelerated. Download free!

3-30 Will Bill Get All the Bills?

MON, 3-30-09


SANTA FE - How likely is it that Gov. Bill Richardson will sign the piece of legislation in which you are most interested? The answer is not to bet on anything yet.
Bills that are delivered to the governor's office with less that three days left in a legislative session, and that is nearly all of them, don't have to be acted upon until 20 days after the end of a session. This year, that date is April 10.
No one knows whether the deadline arrives at noon or midnight. Legislative days begin and end at noon but no court has been asked if that applies to the signing deadline. There is a good enough chance the decision would be noon that governors play it safe and finish their work by noon.
Besides signing or vetoing a measure, a third option exists. By doing neither, a governor can pocket veto a bill. You won't find that language in the law but it has been popular parlance for decades. Gov. Ed Mechem, during the '50s was known for his pocket vetoes.
Opponents liked to say he was just too lazy to read the bills. Disinterested might have been a better word. Big Ed had the feeling that lawmakers sent him a lot more bills than were necessary. Govs. Bruce king and Gary Johnson also shared that impression.
So, let's say the bill in which you are interested passed both houses of the Legislature by comfortable margins and the governor has told you he's for it. That doesn't mean much unless his signature is on there.
Governors have been known to change their mind. A tremendous amount of lobbying occurs during the 20 days after the Legislature adjourns. And the rule is to never assume what the governor will do.
The Legislature also is a factor in whether your bill gets signed. Before it gets sent to the governor, it must be proofread, enrolled and engrossed before it becomes official.
Much effort is put into this process by legislative staff to assure that the final draft of the bill is exactly as the Legislature intends. That means some bills barely reach the governor before his deadline. In those cases, the governor's staff may not have time to analyze them and they go into the pocket-veto stack.
According to Marjorie Childress of the New Mexico Independent blog only 40 of the 339 bills passed during the 2009 Legislature had reached the governor's office by Wednesday after the Legislature adjourned. That is 40 bills in about four days. Unless that process speeds up, all 339 bills will not arrive in time for analysis.
In previous 60-day sessions, lawmakers have sent Gov. Richardson considerably more than this year's 339 measures, so it should be easier to get all bills sent on time. That decrease in legislation passed may be due to less money for new government programs that require appropriations.
Another reason for fewer bills being passed this year may be that committees were slower about hearing bills. The House complained about Senate slowness during the last week of the session and stopped hearing Senate bills until it was satisfied that solons had speeded up.
New Mexico has some of the shortest legislative sessions of any state. Many states stay in session all year, just as Congress does. Our Legislature is sometimes accused of dallying but in comparison, it works at a good pace. And all legislative bodies end in a rush regardless of the tie they have had.
This was Gov. Richardson's last 60-day regular session. Thirty-day sessions are confined primarily to budget matters. The longer sessions are wide open. Richardson fired many, many new initiatives at lawmakers during the early years of his two four-year terms.
Six years into his tenure most of those bullets have been fired. Some legislators have observed that Richardson seemed less engaged this session. That could be a reason for fewer bills being generated out of his office this year.

---

Windows Live™ SkyDrive: Get 25 GB of free online storage. Check it out.

RE: 3-27 U.S. Interest in Mexico Rekindled

Yes there is. Thanks for catching it. The tariffs are on items sold by the United States to Mexico.
 

---

Subject: RE: 3-27 U.S. Interest in Mexico Rekindled
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:10:22 -0600
From: marthamauritson@currentargus.com
To: insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

Is there something wrong with the first sentence below?  This is from the fourth graf of the 3/27 column.

 

 

 

 

Mexico has retaliated by slapping tariffs of 10 to 45 percent on just about everything shipped into the United States. Mexico is the biggest customer for U.S. goods after Canada. The sanctions will affect $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.

---

From: Jay Miller [mailto:insidethecapitol@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 8:45 AM
To: bwaters@sfnewmexican.com; todd@lascrucesbulletin.com; irussell@sfnewmexican.com; cez@cathiezacher.org; publisher@lascrucesbulletin.com; Mauritson, Martha - Carlsbad; editor@roswell-record.com; laeditor@lamonitor.com; dguiliani@lasvegasoptic.com; danielrussell@hobbsnews.com; silvercitydaily@yahoo.com; commonsensical.jaymiller@blogger.com; ftsumnercoc@plateautel.net; rgsunedit@cybermesa.com; andrewpoertner@yahoo.com; tgallagher@cybermesa.com; tmcdonald@lasvegasoptic.com
Subject: 3-27 U.S. Interest in Mexico Rekindled

---

Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.

---

Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.

3-27 U.S. Interest in Mexico Rekindled

FRI, 3-27-09


SANTA FE - Mexico typically is ignored by U.S. officials but for the next month it will receive major attention as President Obama and several cabinet officials pay visits.
Drug cartel violence is the primary focus of states that border our southern neighbor but other issues, such as trade problems, also are a concern that federal officials must address.
Trade problems would be a bigger issue in New Mexico except that our volume of trade pales in comparison with the other border states. During the 2008 elections Obama and Hillary Clinton both campaigned on pulling out of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement without major concessions by Canada and Mexico.
Earlier this month, the Democratic-controlled Congress cancelled a pilot program that allowed Mexican trucks to cross into the United States. Mexico has retaliated by slapping tariffs of 10 to 45 percent on just about everything shipped into the United States. Mexico is the biggest customer for U.S. goods after Canada. The sanctions will affect $2.4 billion in U.S. exports.
But drug cartel violence is what is on the lips of the New Mexicans I talk to. This violence now reaches Albuquerque and Phoenix and is moving even farther north. Juarez is the center of the border violence with over 2,000 murders in just the past year. Palomas also is seeing much violence.
Up to now, President Obama has directed scant attention to the border violence. But now he has ordered two drug enforcement teams totaling 450 agents to the New Mexico border. South of the border, the Mexican Army has been deployed to Juarez, which has become a battle zone.
Unfortunately the drug cartels can match the army in manpower and exceed it in firepower with assault weapons purchased in the United States. Mexico would like us to do something about that problem, such as reinstating our ban on sale of assault weapons.
Some observers have even ventured that Mexico is on the verge of collapse because of the power of drug cartels. Author Dave Clary checks in from Roswell to caution that Mexico has been through much worse and survived.
The country has a long tradition of outlaw gangs dating back to the centuries of Spanish control. Clary says the groups started in the 15th century as part of Spain's effort to drive out the Moors. The outlaws began appearing in Mexico soon after Spanish colonization began.
This time the target was the handful of Spanish who controlled most of the wealth and all of government. Many land reform movements have been mounted over the centuries but none has succeeded.
The land reform leaders always have been seen as heroes by the poor and the Mexican Indians who were deprived of their farmland. Until land reform is achieved, outlaws always will prey on the rich and government. And they will be heroes to the poor.
The United States first learned of these irregular forces when it invaded Mexico in the 1840s. The Mexican Army wasn't much of a challenge for our troops, but the outlaw groups were another story. The Mexican government was accustomed to attempting to eradicate these outlaw gangs but with the country under attack, the outlaws sided with the government and became a formidable force.
Had we paid attention to Mexico's struggle for independence from Spain in the early 1800s, we would have realized the major role these banditos played in Mexico's success.
Clary says the current outbreak of drug cartels is a continuation of the old tradition right down to the torture and beheadings. The bandit groups in Mexico will continue until that government figures out a way to bring some equity into its treatment of the poor.
And our government and Mexico's are not going to defeat the drug cartels as long as we are fighting a war on drugs that ignores the American demand for drugs and does something about our supply of assault weapons to the cartels.
Clary explains much of this history in Eagles and Empire, due in July.

---

Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.

3-25 column update

WED, 3-25-09


SANTA FE - March Madness. That's what Attorney General Gary King calls the aftermath of the 2009 New Mexico Legislature. He does see some good coming out of the session but figures most of the results were either bad or ugly.
The amount of good that came from the session depends on who is doing the talking. The state's business community, for instance, should be ecstatic. As the session began a spokesman for New Mexico businesses said he saw three things coming out of the 2009 session: taxes, taxes, taxes.
Zero out of three won't win any tournaments but it should please many New Mexicans that the 2009 Legislature managed to balance the budget without raising any taxes. Most states were not as lucky.
Arizona, for instance, is $3 billion short on a $10 billion budget. The governor and Republican Legislature are currently fighting over the need for a huge tax increase. There's nothing new about that. Democrat Gov. Janet Napolitano did fought lawmakers for six years. But she's now in Washington on the president's cabinet.
The current governor is former Republican legislative leader Jan Brewer, who says she can't believe one of her first actions in office is to propose a tax increase after having fought them for years. She says the only place to cut that much money is in education and she's not going to jeopardize the state's future by doing that.
The possibility always exists that a special session later in the year could raise our taxes if the economy gets significantly worse. But it doesn't appear likely. In January, discussion centered on an April or May special session. In February, talk turned to a summer session. Now a fall special session is deemed the most likely timing. That's an indication our leaders are becoming more confident of our fiscal position.
Some of the committee chairmen, who didn't get their jobs finished during the regular session, have mentioned a special session as a time they might get some of their work finished.
The biggest dallier was Sen. Linda Lopez, chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, who didn't get confirmation hearings finished and who ended the session with numerous ethics bills stranded in her committee.
The judiciary and finance committees of both houses also are famous for being places bills go to die. Not to be Pollyannaish about this, however, many of those deaths are intentional.
A special session also could be a good time to work on webcasting technology some more. And the House still has to get the ball rolling on webcasting of floor sessions. The Senate got a great deal of bad press for authorizing the purchase of webcasting equipment and then taking it down. But the House hasn't even taken those steps.
Parking, however, will still be a problem for everyone but lawmakers until at least next January. A large parking garage is being constructed on the west side of the Capitol Building. It was scheduled to be finished by this past January but the many problems of getting anything done in Santa Fe are making a completion by next January start looking optimistic.
An item we never got around to discussing during the legislative session was Tax Increment Development Districts, or TIDDs. Three such legislative authorizations were sought this past session for in Albuquerque and Las Cruces.
A big California firm wants to develop the former Atrisco Land Grant southwest of Albuquerque. Huge media buys sought to sell the idea to New Mexicans statewide and a lobbying team, the size of which has seldom been seen, was hired to twist lawmakers' arms.
Considering the amount of money spent, passage was considered a slam-dunk. But around midnight on the last full day of the session, the measure died on a tie vote, while the other Albuquerque TIDD request for redevelopment of the Winrock shopping center passed easily.
The following morning, time ran out before the non-controversial TIDD request for Las Cruces could be approved.
You'll hear much more on this subject in coming months.

---

Internet Explorer 8 – Now Available. Faster, safer, easier. Download FREE now!

3-25 revision

The TIDD item at end of column has been updated.

---

Internet Explorer 8 – Now Available. Faster, safer, easier. Download FREE now!

March Madness In NM

WED, 3-25-09


SANTA FE - March Madness. That's what Attorney General Gary King calls the aftermath of the 2009 New Mexico Legislature. He does see some good coming out of the session but figures most of the results were either bad or ugly.
The amount of good that came from the session depends on who is doing the talking. The state's business community, for instance, should be ecstatic. As the session began a spokesman for New Mexico businesses said he saw three things coming out of the 2009 session: taxes, taxes, taxes.
Zero out of three won't win any tournaments but it should please many New Mexicans that the 2009 Legislature managed to balance the budget without raising any taxes. Most states were not as lucky.
Arizona, for instance, is $3 billion short on a $10 billion budget. The governor and Republican Legislature are currently fighting over the need for a huge tax increase. There's nothing new about that. Democrat Gov. Janet Napolitano did fought lawmakers for six years. But she's now in Washington on the president's cabinet.
The current governor is former Republican legislative leader Jan Brewer, who says she can't believe one of her first actions in office is to propose a tax increase after having fought them for years. She says the only place to cut that much money is in education and she's not going to jeopardize the state's future by doing that.
The possibility always exists that a special session later in the year could raise our taxes if the economy gets significantly worse. But it doesn't appear likely. In January, discussion centered on an April or May special session. In February, talk turned to a summer session. Now a fall special session is deemed the most likely timing. That's an indication our leaders are becoming more confident of our fiscal position.
Some of the committee chairmen, who didn't get their jobs finished during the regular session, have mentioned a special session as a time they might get some of their work finished.
The biggest dallier was Sen. Linda Lopez, chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, who didn't get confirmation hearings finished and who ended the session with numerous ethics bills stranded in her committee.
The judiciary and finance committees of both houses also are famous for being places bills go to die. Not to be Pollyannaish about this, however, many of those deaths are intentional.
A special session also could be a good time to work on webcasting technology some more. And the House still has to get the ball rolling on webcasting of floor sessions. The Senate got a great deal of bad press for authorizing the purchase of webcasting equipment and then taking it down. But the House hasn't even taken those steps.
Parking, however, will still be a problem for everyone but lawmakers until at least next January. A large parking garage is being constructed on the west side of the Capitol Building. It was scheduled to be finished by this past January but the many problems of getting anything done in Santa Fe are making a completion by next January start looking optimistic.
An item we never got around to discussing during the legislative session was Tax Incentive Development Districts, or TIDDs. Two such legislative authorizations were sought this past session for large tracts of land in the Albuquerque area. A big California firm wants to develop the former Atrisco Land Grant southwest of town.
Huge media buys sought to sell the idea to New Mexicans statewide and a lobbying team, the size of which has seldom been seen, was hired to twist lawmakers' arms.
Considering the amount of money spent, passage was considered a slam-dunk. But long after midnight on the last full day of the session, the measure died on a tie vote, while the other TIDD request for redevelopment of the Winrock shopping center passed easily.
Reasons for that defeat will be analyzed for months.

---

Get quick access to your favorite MSN content with Internet Explorer 8. Download FREE now!

3-23 The Legislature Different

MON, 3-23-09


SANTA FE - Old time New Mexico politicos would not have recognized this year's legislature. It was even more different than the City Different in which it met. The ballgame has changed, maybe not for good, but some of it wasn't all that bad.
The puny economy made a difference. Not as many people came to town. Capitol hallways weren't as full. Parties were smaller and fewer. And there was less of a party atmosphere. It seemed more businesslike.
Some of the old pros say they'd like to see it stay that way. It doesn't have to change back. The atmosphere was once even wilder than recently. When the liquor industry ruled with its "fair trade" price fixing, hotel hallways were lined with cases of liquor at every lawmaker's door.
Lawmakers, this year, knew they had a job to do and it wasn't going to be much fun cutting budgets. Fewer people were in town to ask for money. Professional lobbyists still made it to town but they didn't have the usual bucks to throw around. Invitation lists, this year, primarily were limited to lawmakers and a guest, not their entire staffs and extended families.
Another difference, this year, was the role of the governor's office. In past years, Gov. Bill Richardson was a major presence in the legislative process, meeting with leaders and others, coaxing and cajoling to advance his initiatives and calling people on the carpet when he didn't get his way.
This year, the governor's office was still involved. Staff members attended hearings and advocated the administration's causes. But the overwhelming awareness that Big Bill was watching somehow didn't permeate the atmosphere as it once did.
Lawmakers joked that they felt Richardson's presence more in the past two years, when he was out of state, running for president and top-level appointments than when he was home during this session. And Richardson has been home. He hasn't even attended meetings of governors, which he so relished in past years.
Tough economic times, of course, limit the number of initiatives this governor has been able to push. Just tending to all the irons he already has in the fire has been enough to keep one occupied.
Gov. Richardson began his bold initiatives six years ago promising that the economic development he would bring to New Mexico would be sufficient to maintain the initiatives. It worked for a while but now everyone's economy is down.
A difference that was expected this year was the effect of having a larger than usual number of new legislators. Some surprising Democratic primary defeats last June, followed by a Democratic landslide in the fall, brought a bunch of young bucks to town.
For several years, the state Senate had been beating down social issues by one or two votes. The new Senate makeup was expected to change that balance. The only problem was that in order to reach the floor of the Senate, bills have to get through committees.
The very first vote of the legislative session turned out to have a huge influence on those other votes. The new Senate Democrats chose a new Senate president pro tem. That post has the major influence on appointments to committees. But Senate Republicans also get to vote on the pro tem. They paired with some conservative and some opportunistic Democrats to keep Sen. Tim Jennings of Roswell in the post.
As a consequence, the new "progressive" Democrats weren't on some of the committees that decided whether the controversial social issues would make it to the floor of the Senate. Some didn't. When one did, such as repeal of the death penalty, it passed rather easily.
But this hasn't been a legislative session dominated by big city progressives. It has been New Mexico's history for many years that when it appears the liberals are about to take over, a conservative coalition will beat them out every time.

---

Windows Live™ Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. Check it out.

And Now the End Is Near...

FRI, 3-20-09


SANTA FE - Ready or not, it all ends at 12 noon on Saturday. The official timepiece is the wristwatch of the majority leader of each house. It's not the clock on the wall that everyone on the chamber can see. That wouldn't be any fun.
It's those unseen timepieces that the House and Senate leaders control that tell the official time. And, of course, control and power are the names of the game that is played in the Legislature. The way things work is controlled by where the most power lies and who grabs the most.
No longer are there as many visible shenanigans. Majority leaders no longer stop the clock as they did 40 years ago. That was taken to court. And the court said 12 noon means 12 noon.
It's just gotten more subtle. The sign on the Senate webcasting screen says that nothing one sees is official. "Official" is determined by what Senate leaders declare is official.
The budget bill, which began in the House, has emerged from the Senate Finance Committee. Gov. Bill Richardson has declared himself dissatisfied with it because money has been taken from education to put in Senate pork barrel projects.
Money to purchase the College of Santa Fe campus was cleared from the budget. Teachers and state employees are still upset that they are expected to use their federal stimulus payments to offset 1.5 percent of the employer's share of their retirement benefit that they must pick up for two years.
A bill to readjust the public School distribution formula has made it through the House along with an increase of 0.75 in the state gross receipts tax. It doesn't have much time to get far in the Senate.
Efforts to extend health care haven't gone much of any place. Federal stimulus funds may help some. But progressives have lost another one.
The general rule is that the amount of time spent publicly discussing a topic varies in inverse proportion to its importance. Thus education, health care, and even the budget take a back seat to items of a process nature.
One of those big items is ethics, which breaks down into openness, honesty and transparency in government and elections. The Senate is known for dragging its feet on these issues, especially the leadership. After talking all session about it, some of those bills finally are being brought out of the dark in the final week, when only miracles can get them through the rest of the process on time.
An item that appeared to interest lawmakers was increasing the transparency of nonprofit organizations that venture close to political activity. But that now appears dead, as predicted here, because of far-reaching unintended consequences.
Openness of Senate sessions through video webcasting has been amusing. The Senate bought three cameras but decided to use only one stationary camera. It captures the backs, and bald heads, of nine of the 42 senators in the middle of the chamber. Even the senators see the humor.
On the good news side, a bill lowering title insurance costs is on its way to the governor. A second bill advocated by Think-New Mexico, to decrease the size of schools, has passed the Senate and is in the House.
As predicted here a week ago, late session tensions resulted in a temporary standoff between the House and Senate over slowness of the Senate in hearing House bills. The House recessed for a while on Wednesday while the pressure was relieved. The result was night sessions for both houses to catch up with work.
Expect late sessions again tonight as both houses move toward noon adjournment tomorrow. Saturday morning sessions are a wild card. Sometimes much happens. Sometimes nothing happens. The Senate sometimes filibusters. Once, it completed its work Friday night and had a huge party in the chamber all Saturday morning.

---

Hotmail® is up to 70% faster. Now good news travels really fast. Find out more.

3-18 The Final Days

WED, 3-18-09


SANTA FE - With the final days of the 2009 Legislature staring us in the face, it is now obvious where most everything is headed.
Budget decisions have been made but await a special session in the spring or summer if the economy changes more than expected. New Mexico's cuts won't be as great as in states that had more booming economies.
Teachers and state employees will be required to assume a larger portion of their employers' retirement contributions. That means their take home pay will decrease. The state budget surplus remains at a healthy 13 percent.
As for other major or well-publicized items, ethics will get its usual short shrift. As with other important items, such as education and health care, everyone talks about ethics but somehow little ever happens. It is difficult to believe most lawmakers care nothing about ethics, so the fault must be with legislative leaders.
The public's desire for a legislative and political system that is open and honest should be a no-brainer. But despite predictions from legislative leaders, who oppose ethics legislation, that significant improvements will be made this year in spite of them, very little is happening.
As usual, a small tidbit is tossed out so everyone can brag. A bill establishing limits on political contributions passed the Senate with only one dissenting vote and should easily clear the House.
The $2,300 limit is low for a gubernatorial candidate but ridiculously high for legislative candidates. They don't often receive that much but it will now become a goal.
The bill, as passed by the Senate, does nothing to prohibit contributions from lobbyists or contractors doing business with the state, so it doesn't solve any immediate problems.
But while going easy on themselves, lawmakers have enthusiastically tackled the new nonprofit groups that ended some longtime legislative careers last year. Senate Bill 652 would allow citizens or politicians to go to court to block the political activity of any organization until that organization discloses the source of its funding.
Webcasting of legislative proceedings is another sure bet, even though legislative leaders don't want it. They got outflanked by independent reporters who are having great fun. They have announced plans to continue, unhampered by legislative rules.
To head that off, the Senate passed a bill unanimously to do the webcasting itself and impose many rules. If the restrictions get too ridiculous, the independents are sure to be back in business again next year.
If the House passes the Senate version, only one camera will be used. It will be in the back of the room. It can't focus on lawmakers' desks and the transmissions will not be archived. They don't want anyone using recordings for future political ads.
Reportedly the opposition to efforts to encourage smaller school buildings is coming from the Albuquerque Public Schools. Admittedly, it will be difficult for large districts with large buildings to cut back. But reasonable-sounding alternatives have been proposed.
Students in buildings that already are overly large can be broken down into smaller learning communities. Some big schools in other larger cities already are doing that with noticeable improvements in discipline, dropouts and student performance.
If it works, why not give it a chance? Many of New Mexico's larger districts say they're willing to give it a go. But Albuquerque continues to drag its feet. In fact, it has announced that it plans to build a third football stadium despite its tight financial situation.
Obviously diehard athletic supporters are hard to change but Albuquerque's problem may be different. It is one of the 50 largest school districts in the nation. And proud of it. Very proud of it. So proud that even the mention of the word "smaller" sends shivers down its spine.
The current effort has nothing to do with splitting up the Albuquerque Public Schools, but one would never know it from the APS actions.

---

Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.

March column

RTR March 09 Jay Miller


2009 SESSION ENDS

It's the final days of the 2009 Legislature and state employees are wondering what that might mean for them. In this year of budget cutting, there aren't many visions of sugarplums dancing in any heads.
Most jobs appear to be safe. But that's about it. Gubernatorial appointees have the most to sweat. But they knew that when they got the job. Salaries appear safe but employee contributions to insurance and retirement may take a hit.
Even that is hard to know. The governor has 20 days after the session ends to decide what he likes and doesn't. Then there's the special session later this spring, when the revenue picture looks clearer. And that's all complicated by the federal stimulus money and how it is used.
So, it's an even sillier season than usual. Lawmakers are meeting late into the night. State agencies are being asked for all sorts of information. And if you're a legislative employee, fergeddaboudit. Sleep happens sometime next week.

TONEY'S BACK

And how about that wild new temporary state agency to manage $1.8 billion in federal stimulus funds? That could certainly be a wild card. What's going to happen with that? Former Gov. Toney Anaya will be heading it, aided by a bunch of deputy secretaries and division directors from around state government. That's going to be the subject of a whole lot of conversations,.
Anyway, it will be good to see Tough Toney Anaya around again. Of course, he never disappeared but now he's going to be in the news a lot more. Not that Toney ever would do it, but he could do some gloating these days. His idea about a bullet train back in 1983 was ridiculed but now it is a reality.
Well, almost. It's not going to outrun any speeding bullets, but the Rail Runner does take passengers from Belen to Santa Fe. The United States just hasn't gotten into bullet trains yet like Europe and Asia, but maybe one of these days.
And as you may remember, Toney commuted the sentences of everyone on death row as he was leaving office. He couldn't get the death penalty repealed but that was the next best thing. Now, 23 years later, anti-death penalty legislation has passed both the House and Senate. As this is being written, we don't know what Gov. Bill Richardson will do with the measure when it reaches his desk.

WHERE'S DENISH?

And why did Gov. Richardson choose former Gov. Anaya instead of Lt. Gov. Diane Denish to head the Office of Recovery and Reinvestment? Are things that tense between the two? Or did Lady Di decide it might be best to steer clear of a governor whose popularity is on the wane in order to take on an issue as controversial as the stimulus?
Besides, awarding dozens of contracts can get dicey. The media and political opponents will be scrutinizing every single award to find out who knows who and who gave campaign contributions and when. Maybe she's better off this way. But I hope she was asked.
Lt. Gov. Denish still will have a piece of the action. She will be working with the governor's science adviser to seek more than New Mexico's share of billions available in separate competitive grants. Anything gained there would be a feather in her cap.
And Denish wants as many feathers in her cap as she can get. It's no secret that she has been preparing for some time to run for governor next year. As of now, she has no declared competition. But that doesn't keep people from talking about it. And it doesn't keep others from speculating.
Hollywood actor Val Kilmer continues to drop hints that he is seriously looking. It was reported recently that Kilmer has part of his Pecos River ranch up for sale. Does that mean he is putting together money for his campaign?
Not really. He's had that property for sale ever since he signed up for a slew of movie roles, several years ago, that he knew would keep him away from his ranch for long periods.
But money, even for a rich guy like Kilmer, is something to think about. Denish has money too. And she already has raised $2 million from others. She has enjoyed issuing campaign finance reports even more often than required just so everyone knows that she's way ahead of them.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE PROGRESSIVES?
When several new Democratic senators were elected last year, people in the progressive movement (That's the folks that used to be called liberals) figured this would be the year to achieve some goals that the state Senate had previously blocked.
But it hasn't been happening? The Senate leadership remained the same. Health care initiatives have stalled and domestic partnerships were defeated. But then came the victory for opponents to the death penalty. And the margin was much bigger than expected.
What does that mean for the chances of future progressive legislation? Maybe not much. New Mexico is a blue state but historically, it always has leaned toward the conservative. We remain a somewhat rural state. Add to that the federal installations that have moved in and we still remain pretty close to the center.

-30-

---

Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync. Check it out.

3-16 Lawmakers, Nonprofits Square Off

MON, 3-16-09


SANTA FE - Wouldn't it be a hoot if the only ethics legislation passed this year were to be a bill to requiring more disclosure by nonprofit organizations?
The current New Mexico legislative leadership, especially in the Senate, shows absolutely no inclination to reveal anything more than it has to about money its members receive or how they conduct meetings.
But these same lawmakers are very anxious to know all about any new organizations that seek to educate the public about issues facing the Legislature.
I'll be the first to acknowledge that there is much to be curious about. Lawmakers are accustomed to nonprofits that are dirt poor. Operating on miniscule budgets, these organizations have sent volunteer lobbyists to Santa Fe to beg for pittances of money.
Then, last year at about this time, brochures started hitting mailboxes explaining about good government issues and citing the voting record of lawmakers representing that district. It didn't cause a great amount of alarm at the time but on primary election day, three powerful Democratic committee chairmen were defeated and a fourth almost unseated.
That caught the attention of political leaders. The three defeated lawmakers filed suit. The attorney general and secretary of state demanded the nonprofits file a list of contributors. Who was suddenly giving big bucks to nonprofit groups?
In the fall, others were targeted, including Republicans. Senate Minority Leader Lee Rawson was defeated. Something had to be done about this new power. It wasn't spending as much money as corporate or union groups. But its success rate was phenomenal.
The nonprofit leaders contended they were merely exercising their free speech rights to educate their members and the public. Legislative leaders countered that since nonprofit organizations receive a tax break, the government has a right to regulate them.
The nonprofits argued that they were complying with all laws governing them and they were only required to disclose their contributors once a year. At issue is whether the groups' activities crossed over from the educational to the electioneering realm.
This year's Legislature may provide an answer this week. But it won't be the final answer. Courts have been all over the place on these issues. One legislative sponsor explained that the current bill under consideration is experimental to determine validity of the argument that favorable tax treatment is a public subsidy.
If tax exemptions are eventually ruled to be a subsidy, permitting a degree of governmental control. The same questions will be raised about other entities receiving tax breaks. Roundhouse chatter indicates religious institutions and companies receiving bailout money could be likely targets for scrutiny on issues related to political education activities.
The controversy is likely to get dirty. Any group that can start picking off party leaders will be fought hard. Legislative leaders note that one of the nonprofit groups' big issues is legislative transparency and yet the nonprofits don't want to be transparent.
Nonprofit representatives charge legislative leaders with being the biggest problems with any kind of ethics legislation getting passed. Charges of hypocrisy fly in all directions. They both have a point but this is just big league competition in which both sides work at maximizing their advantages.
The webcasting fiasco that has dogged this entire legislative session has some deep roots in the legislator defeats of last year. Legislative leaders fear the nonprofit groups will use clips in their materials next year.
Lawmakers say any organization receiving a tax break is getting government support and is subject to government scrutiny. Nonprofits say it is even more important to scrutinize those who oversee the spending of all public money. And, they contend, they are the only ones doing it.
Well, let me put in a word for the media at this point. Our founders had in mind a free press protecting the public from the monarchies they had endured in Europe. We do a reasonably good job but, at times, come in for our share of attacks too.

---

Windows Live™ Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. Check it out.

3-13 Should Title Companies Get Special Treatment?

FRI, 3-13-09


SANTA FE - Are New Mexico homeowners getting the shaft on their title insurance? The 2009 Legislature is again being asked to consider the possibility. Last year, legislation to reform the industry got sidetracked and delayed. This year's possibilities look better.
New Mexico Public Regulation Commission Chairman Ben Ray Lujan was the leading advocate of the legislation last year. Now that Lujan is a member of Congress, his father, New Mexico House Speaker Ben Lujan, is championing the legislation.
The PRC no longer is on board with the reform. Lujan, Jr. was replaced by Jerome Block, Jr., who worked for a title insurance company before winning the $90,000 a year PRC post.
But having the House speaker as chief sponsor doesn't hurt at all. The bill has sailed through the House and has time to get through the Senate. This year's bill also is a compromise fashioned by Lujan, the title industry and Think New Mexico, the reform's major consumer advocate.
Attorney General Gary King also is participating in the title insurance battle. His focus is on the practice in which title agents market their insurance to realtors and loan agents rather than to consumers.
How many times have you ever shopped for title insurance? Like me, you may just go along with the insurer chosen by your bank or finance company. King says this makes title premiums much higher.
National statistics indicate that 80 percent of the insurance premium goes to the agent who sells the title policy. The legislation making its way through the New Mexico Senate caps that at 81 percent. An average 4.3 percent of premium is used to pay actual title insurance claims.
Most nations don't have such title insurance problems. The government researches land titles, guarantees them and compensates injured parties if it makes a mistake. In the United States, private industry performs the function. That is commendable but in New Mexico, title companies say it is too big a burden for them to shoulder.
So several years ago, New Mexico title companies managed to convince the Legislature to make us the only state in which title companies aren't liable for their mistakes.
Some national figures may shed light on the situation. Nationally five families of insurance companies handle 93 percent of the title insurance business. Only 7 percent are small regional companies, or mom-and-pop operations as New Mexico title insurers like to call themselves.
Through a state-mandated title insurance rate, New Mexico title companies have been able to survive and thrive. If rates were allowed to become competitive, the big boys would come in with discount rates and drive the little guys out of the market.
That would be unfortunate for the New Mexico title insurance industry and it would take another little chink out of our state's economy.
But do title insurance companies have any reason to be treated differently than corner grocery stores, clothing stores, hardware stores, mortuaries, banks, credit bureaus and dozens of other small businesses in every community that have been forced to sell out or go under in the wake of the big guys coming in?
Title insurance companies enjoy a government-protected status accorded to only a select few companies such as ambulances and tow trucks, for which consumers don't have time to shop.
But where is the rationale for home title insurance to have rates set by the state? There is time for people to make a few calls, or check a website, as Lujan's bill would create.
And why do home title insurance rates have to be just as high for refinancing? A title search already has been done. A quick check for new liens is about all that is necessary.
At a time when the housing industry is in so much trouble, making a home purchase a little easier on the consumer would seem to be very intelligent.

---

Windows Live™ Contacts: Organize your contact list. Check it out.

3-11 Is Smaller Better?

WED, 3-11-09


SANTA FE - How do we improve our schools? It's a question we've been asking since the '50s when the Soviets beat us into space. Our first answer was to build bigger schools.
At one time, New Mexico had nearly 1,500 school buildings, many of them the one-room variety. Over the years, that was cut to only about 600 buildings. Bigger was better. The entire nation became enamored with assembly lines and the economies of scale.
Education opinion makers of the '60s called for the elimination of small rural schools because they didn't have the resources to adequately teach science and other subjects. We won the race to the soon but soon realized that we still weren't leading the world in academic achievement.
So we looked for other solutions. It seemed obvious that smaller class sizes would improve education. We made some real progress in that area but reducing class size meant hiring more teachers. Although teachers never have been paid well, they form the huge bulk of a district's budget. So only so much could be done on that count.
Paying teachers more was another solution. Better pay would attract a better quality of teacher. But that too was a very expensive solution.
Currently, political thinking reasons that if we test students more often, they'll get smarter. And those who don't will be punished by receiving less federal money for their schools. Its called accountability. Politicians love it, but it's not making our kids smarter.
So now we're off on another path. At first glance, this one appears even more loony than its predecessor. Instead of bigger is better, we're thinking maybe smaller is better. Sure, it goes against everything that made America the greatest industrialized nation in the world. But maybe the factory model doesn't work in a school system.
Research is indicating that maybe there might be something to this notion. They're finding that smaller schools have higher graduation rates, higher student achievement, greater safety, more extracurricular opportunities and greater satisfaction among students, parents, teachers and principals.
That's not a bad record for an idea that sounds counterintuitive to begin with. How did all this get started? Well, many parents discovered their kids were bored, alienated and fearful of their safety. So they started looking to smaller private schools. Public school advocates then countered by inventing charter schools that could receive public funds but operate more like small private schools.
Meanwhile schools in small communities started being noted for their success in graduating much higher percentages of students. And these students were doing well when they went to college.
What's going on here? Are we talking about diseconomies of scale? Apparently so. Small schools don't have to hire police forces to protect their students. In many large high schools, they are equipped with metal detectors, surveillance cameras and weapons. School buses are another cost of big schools that draw from large areas.
But aren't large schools cheaper per student to build? The answer is yes, absent some creative thinking that currently is being utilized by some small schools. Instead of building their own libraries, ball fields, auditoriums and pools, some schools are entering into partnerships with public libraries, community centers, cultural centers, parks, museums and other community resources.
And even without this creative thinking, the cost of big buildings per graduate, rather than per student, is proving to be a bargain.
But aren't there other disadvantages to small schools? What about narrower curriculum offerings? Research is showing that broader curricula aren't much broader in core subjects.
Yes, but what about athletics? That's important to a lot of community leaders. Smaller schools offer many more students the opportunity to participate and to develop leadership skills. And how many kids go on to play college or pro ball anyway? When I was a kid, schools weren't classified by size. Virden was twice state basketball champion. And Deming was state football champ in 1950.
Our Legislature is now considering school size. It's well worth the look.

---

Express your personality in color! Preview and select themes for Hotmail®. See how.

3-9 NM Think Tank Optimistic

MON, 3-09-09


SANTA FE - With only two weeks left in the 2009 Legislature, a results-oriented think tank that has proved its effectiveness yearly since its creation a decade ago, feels good about two major pieces of legislation it is promoting this year.
Santa Fe-based Think-New Mexico reports that its two big initiatives for the year are now on track to make it through the Legislature by its March 21 adjournment.
Last week, House Bill 488, sponsored by House Speaker Ben Lujan, cleared the House Business and Industry Committee unanimously. Lujan's measure is designed to reform troublesome features of New Mexico's title insurance industry.
Currently New Mexico is one of only three states that allow the state insurance commissioner to set title insurance rates. Lujan's bill would allow for price competition.
In addition, New Mexico is the only state with a statute that protects the industry from being sued for negligence. When title companies overlook undisclosed easements or liens, property owners are left unprotected.
Think New Mexico and the state Public Regulation Commission tried to push through similar legislation last year but ran out of time in the short, 30-day session. Part of the reason was stiff competition from the title insurance business.
This year, there was more time to negotiate. Lengthy negotiations with title insurance representatives resulted in an agreement that lowers title insurance costs for consumers without harming local agents.
The state insurance superintendent will still set rates but he can allow less expensive rates and will report the exceptions to the Public Regulation Commission and the Legislature.
The insurance superintendent also must publish rates and closing fees on the PRC Website, thereby allowing consumers to shop for better rates.
The agreement also will prohibit something called reverse competition, a process in which title companies market their services, not to consumers, but to homebuilders or realtors.
The other piece of Think New Mexico legislation now on the move is its Smaller Schools Bill, designed to tackle the state's dropout crisis while also saving taxpayer dollars.
The idea sounds somewhat counterintuitive but recent research uncovered by the think tank reveals that economies of size do not apply to learning, especially when considering successful learning.
New Mexico's graduation rate ranks next to last among the 50 states and District of Columbia. Nevada is last, by the way. Only 54 percent of New Mexico's children graduate from high school compared to 71 percent nationally.
Think New Mexico cites studies showing that smaller schools have higher graduation rates, higher student achievement, lower levels of student alienation and violence and higher levels of satisfaction among students, parents, principals and teachers.
Several factors combine to make large schools more expensive than moderate-sized schools. We'll cover those in a later column. Research now shows that the most efficient schools are those serving 600-900 students. And the efficiency factor goes even higher when considering the cost per graduate rather than cost per student.
The small schools bill is SB 255. It is co-sponsored by Sen. Cynthia Nava, chairman of the Senate Education Committee, and Sen. Sue Wilson Beffort, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. That is high-powered bipartisan support. It passed the Senate Education Committee last week on a unanimous vote.
As is usually the case, Think New Mexico is advocating legislation that is not easy to pass. But it has a strong track record. Its board is composed of a bipartisan group of New Mexico's business and political leaders.
Both the bills that comprise its effort this year have created some strong feelings. In this column, we've looked at the proponent's side. Future columns will look in more depth at both sides of these two issues.

---

Windows Live™ Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. Check it out.

3-6 Lawmakers Stroll Toward Panic

FRI, 3-06-09

SANTA FE - With two weeks left in the 2009 Legislature, the pace still hasn't quickened much. Next week, the panic starts. In just a few days, lawmakers will wonder where the time went.
The House and Senate will begin trading accusations that the other house is not moving the bills it has been sent. And we will begin hearing the words "train wreck" again. It doesn't take clairvoyance to predict this. I've been watching 44 years and nothing changes. Trust me, next week there will be talk of not finishing on time.
The one wild card in the whole scenario is the fiscal predicament that seems to have caused near consensus on a special session in late spring. But even that won't prevent a panic next week.
The federal stimulus package has money to help ease our fiscal problem but House Republicans indicated that they aren't too wild about using it. They would rather save the money and make cuts now rather than having to make them next year if the collapse continues.
If every state takes that approach, the collapse likely will continue since the idea of the stimulus is to stimulate the flow of money in the economy. The House passed the state budget bill using the stimulus money and sent it on to the more fiscally cautious Senate.
Some of that upper house conservatism was demonstrated in the significant defeat of the domestic partnerships bill. A coalition of Republicans and conservative Democrats, similar to that which decided the Senate president pro tem race, voiced the opinion that the bill opened the door to eventual gay marriage legislation.
It still appears that not much will happen with ethics legislation. But the kicker there is that the cap may be too high, more than legislators normally receive. The result would be pressure on big donors to give even more.
Jumping ends of the political spectrum, the California Legislature is reported to be considering legalization of marijuana so it can be taxed. It would be a tremendous revenue generator. In 1933, one of the first acts of the New Deal Congress was to repeal prohibition.
* * *
Randy Saavedra, the director of the Administrative Office of the District Attorneys, was arrested recently on suspicion of driving while intoxicated. It wasn't the first time Saavedra made the news recently. Last month two Albuquerque television stations put investigative reporters on the case of a female employee of the AODA who had been on paid leave for almost a year.
Saavedra replied that she was a problem employee whom he couldn't fire because of the State Personnel Act. Since she was near retirement, it was easier to put her on leave with pay until she retired.
This column criticized Saavedra for not seeking advice on how to handle problem employees since they can be fired for cause under the State Personnel Act. They also can be disciplined and helped to improve. But Saavedra took the easy way out and avoided the issue at the expense of taxpayer money.
How many other state employees do you suppose saw those TV reports and thought, "Aha, there's my way out." It's not a very good example for the office of the district attorneys of the state to be setting.
Upon further sleuthing on my own, I discovered that the state Personnel Office offers training sessions on managerial assessment of employees, addressing of workplace conflict and realigning employee performance.
That training session could have saved New Mexico taxpayers a ton of money. The problem is that the Administrative Office of the District Attorneys is not part of the state personnel system and therefore does not participate in the help sessions that are offered to others.
It sounds as though it would be very wise for the AODA and any other state agency not covered by the state personnel system to find a way to avail themselves of some of those good services.

---

Windows Live™ Groups: Create an online spot for your favorite groups to meet. Check it out.