3-1 Will Guv Give Another Extension?

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Will Gov. Bill Richardson be willing to give lawmakers another extension before he calls a special session? It appears the House and Senate still haven't settled their differences.
Gov. Richardson is antsy to get a budget hammered out. He says he doesn't want to send a signal to financial markets that New Mexico has an unsettled budget situation.
Truth be told, not many states have this year's budget firmed up, much less next year's budget. We're just about all in the same boat except that some states have already started taking much more drastic measures than we have so far.
True, some states are worse off than we are but historically New Mexico has been late getting into economic downturns and late getting out of them. So we should be prepared for things to get worse before they get better.
Just because Wall Street is showing a recovery doesn't mean it extends out into the real world. What we thought was going to be an avenue for financial institutions to start lending more money has instead resulted in the big guys putting all that money in savings and obscene bonuses for themselves.
Meanwhile New Mexico lawmakers still are denying the realities of being in a Great Recession. They barely got a bill passed to sweep up $150 million of unused capital outlay money to use for balancing this year's budget. For awhile the bill was dead in a House committee before being revived. But it passed too narrowly to include an emergency clause so it can be used immediately to pay bills.
Another bill to allow drug users an option of therapy at their own expense instead of prison was killed on the House floor before being revived, only to die on the Senate floor.
Meanwhile the prison budget will get a hefty increase while schools get cut. Our society seems to prefer locking up as many people for as long a time as possible, whether they are dangerous or not.
So far, House and Senate leaders appear to still have their differences. Will they go into session without getting them settled? Gov. Richardson says he doesn't want to interrupt election campaigns for House members. Campaign donations can't be solicited during legislative sessions.
The governor waited until too late for many legislators before calling off the session last Wednesday. Many already were on their way to Santa Fe -- in a snowstorm.
House Republican leaders say they have not been involved in any budget negotiations. But Senate Republican leader Stuart Ingle, of Portales, indicates he may have been involved.
Ingle is quoted by the Albuquerque Journal as saying, ""The dialogue never seemed to get started. We didn't seem to have anything we could agree upon."
The difference may be that Senate President Pro Tem Tim Jennings, a Democrat, was elected to his post by Republicans.
Many lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are upset with Gov. Richardson for not revealing the list of 59 political appointees whose jobs he said he would eliminate.
The conclusion most people would draw is that our governor is hiding something from us. Various investigative reporters have been able to identify about a dozen of those employees who are still in state government, although not in their former positions.
They have transferred to other positions, some at the same salary, some at lower salaries. All are in classified positions. The reports emphasize that they have job security and no longer can be fired.
That is only partially true. They have job security but it doesn't kick in for a year. If they are incompetent in their new position, they can be fired. If they are supervised by a political appointee who won't fire them, that appointee is not likely to be there this time next year.
The information uncovered thus far doesn't appear to indicate anything too egregious. Richardson would have been better off had he not appeared to be hiding something.
Maybe it is an invasion of privacy, but political appointees need to expect some scrutiny in return for starting at the top.
MON, 3-01-10

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

We're escaping the cold until 3/17. Will have computer and phone (505-699-9982).

 

Aloha

2-26

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Legislative leaders put up a fuss when Gov. Bill Richardson announced on the final day of the 2010 session that he would call them back into session six days later.
The governor now has given them an additional six days to work out their differences before calling them back into session. March 1 is the new date.
Several senators had said they thought a quick return was a bad idea. And they really won't have any more information with a second six-day extension than they had at the close of the regular session.
There's also no reason to believe they would be any closer to compromise than they were at the close of the session. They have been back home listening to special interest groups that believe compromise is a sign of weakness and that anything short of 100 percent support for their cause is no support at all.
But they are coming back. They could do to the governor what he has been doing to them. They could refuse to return and then call themselves into extraordinary session and set their own rules. Gov. Richardson has been doing that with vetoes followed by executive orders doing it his way.
A Democrat-controlled Legislature called itself into session when Gary Johnson was governor. A Republican controlled Legislature went into session and then immediately adjourned when Toney Anaya was governor.
A surprising amount of mail has crossed my desk suggesting that since the Legislature did not complete its one and only job in 30 days, lawmakers should be forced to work for free until they can produce. None of this $50,000 a day for a special session.
It is highly unusual for a legislature to not get its job done. Very often, lawmakers will talk budget impasse but at the last minute they always will come up with something so they can go home.
On a related issue, restaurant owners want Gov. Richardson to veto the bill allowing guns in restaurants that serve beer and wine. Some propose that lawmakers pass a bill allowing concealed weapons into the state Capitol building.
The same arguments used to pass a bill by heavy margins allowing guns in restaurants serving alcohol would also apply to carrying them into the Capitol. Lawmakers wouldn't require anything of others they wouldn't require of themselves. Would they? Let's share the pain.
The special session may end up with some additional items to discuss. An ethics commission may be one of them.
In the form in which the legislation existed when the regular session ended, citizens who file complaints with the commission and then go public with their charges would be punished much worse than those found guilty by the commission.
Because of that feature, many groups that had been pushing for an ethics commission withdrew their support. The death of such legislation would be just fine with the Senate leadership, which let the bill languish on the final day's calendar without being heard.
The possibility of frivolous or malicious complaints to the commission does exist. But the protections against that are far greater than the likelihood of catching someone doing something wrong.
This is further evidence that a long political career is uppermost in most politicians minds.
The day after the regular session ended, Gov. Richardson was off to Washington for a meeting of the National Governors Association. Governors heard their association's longtime executive director, Ray Scheppach, tell them that states are far from bottoming out.
It will be a decade before anything like normalcy returns, Scheppach warned. States will have to downsize permanently. Some states already are selling assets, consolidating services and combining agencies.
The era of ever stiffer prison sentences will have to end, Scheppach said. Aging inmates are turning prisons into nursing homes. Small schools will have to be consolidated and college faculties will have to increase teaching loads, he added.
Was our governor paying attention?
FRI, 2-26-10

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

 

2-24 How Close Were They?

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- We soon will get to see how close House and Senate Democratic leaders were to negotiating an agreement on next year's budget last week as the 2010 Legislature came to a close.
According to House Speaker Ben Lujan, the parties were "that close" as Maxwell Smart would say, holding his thumb and forefinger almost together. Gov. Bill Richardson says he wants to call lawmakers back quickly so they don't lose their momentum.
Nearly everyone else at the Capitol, however, thinks those assessments are about as accurate as Don Adam's ability to solve a case on the popular 1960s show Get Smart, co-starring longtime Santa Fe resident Barbara Feldon as Agent 99.
Feldon likely gave the appraisals by the governor and speaker a look much like the expression with which she greeted pronouncements by Agent 86.
The weight of the evidence indicates House and Senate finance leaders are still waiting for the other to blink. And they aren't likely to compromise until they both realize the Great Recession is so deep it is going to take a united effort to get us out.
A few days ago, the New Mexico Independent blog carried an item titled Special Session: What Can We Do Better? My first thought was that lawmakers finally were getting their heads straightened out and were asking New Mexicans how they could do better in the special session.
Alas, the staff of the blog was asking what it could do to better cover the special session. I should have known it was too good to be true.
Most lawmakers contend that the failure to produce a budget -- the only requirement of a short session -- was because of having too many other issues put on their plate by the governor.
There are solutions to that problem. Since a budget session of the Legislature is not required to do anything other than pass a budget, nothing requires lawmakers to consider anything other than the budget. Just make a hard and fast rule that nothing else can be introduced. Doesn't that sound easy?
So, what if a legislator gives in to pressure from constituents, special interests or the governor to introduce a bill anyway? The bill doesn't have to be referred to a committee.
If it is, the committee does not have to hear a bill. Many bills every session die in committee at the end of a session without ever being scheduled for a hearing. That should happen to more bills.
Memorials and resolutions usually aren't referred to a committee. They are put on the House speaker's or Senate president's table. Some are discussed and acted upon later in the session. Others aren't.
Don't expect this hard-nosed approach to happen however. Even those who whine about having too full a plate have items they want to introduce.
What do you say if an influential business, interest group or individual in your legislative district wants a favor? Or what if you want to introduce a memorial honoring a star athlete or a recently deceased community leader? Everybody does it because it builds relationships and helps lawmakers get reelected.
Sen. President Pro Tem Tim Jennings, of Roswell, came up with an idea this session. He introduced a joint resolution proposing a constitutional amendment limiting the governor to sending only 25 messages to the House and 25 to the Senate requesting consideration of various issues.
It was one of the many issues that died on adjournment without any action being taken in its first committee.
Another problem would arise if a Legislature decided not to consider anything but finance items. Most lawmakers are not on a finance committee.
Would they attend finance committee meetings and sit in the audience? Would they sleep in all day? The answer likely is that they would find ways to get into mischief.
WED, 2-24-10

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

 

2-22 Legislature Goes Into Overtime

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- The 2010 Legislature didn't get its job done. Democratic leaders knew the unwritten rules. Begin secret negotiations between House and Senate Democratic leaders several days before the session's end while publicly continuing to predict a train wreck.
It didn't work this time. Democratic leaders said they just ran out of time. But the problem, in fact, is that none of them have confronted the reality of a recession that hasn't bottomed out. They still cling to their insistence upon extending the hurt to everyone but themselves.
We aren't going to get out of this until everyone gives up something. But until then, they fashion themselves as manly gunslingers defending their territory.
Part of the problem could be that they all are men. Maybe a little wise counsel from the distaff side of the party would inject some common sense.
Republicans also weren't part of the private negotiations. Would their inclusion have helped? Probably not. Party members have unanimously insisted throughout the session that taxes can't be any part of the solution. It must be all cuts.
But history tells us that if Republicans were in control, it might have worked differently.
Back in the 1970s and early '80s, Democrats were fractured at least as badly as they are today. In the House of Representatives, they named themselves the Mama Lucys and the Cowboys.
The Mama Lucys had a slight advantage in numbers so they ran the show until 1979 when some of the Cowboys formed a coalition with Republicans.
In this coalition, the Cowboys caucused with the Republicans. The Cowboys got to name the Speaker of the House but Republicans controlled the committees and called all the shots.
It was 1985 before Republicans took over the Senate with a similar coalition. The first order of business was a big tax cut. But then New Mexico's economy turned very sour when the price of oil began plummeting.
In 1986 it became evident that something would have to be done to rescue New Mexico from its financial difficulties. Republicans put their heads together and came up with one of the largest tax increases the state has seen.
Today's situation bears many similarities. The state has enjoyed 15 years of tax cuts under Govs. Gary Johnson and Bill Richardson. Over a billion dollars has been trimmed. But now we find ourselves in the position of needing some of that money back.
Could a similar scenario play out today? Not likely. The pot still needs to boil some more. The inclination to seek out government efficiencies should continue as part of a balanced approach to climbing out of our budget hole.
But it doesn't appear we are close to that realization yet. Republicans, conservative Democrats and Gov. Richardson still insist that tax breaks given the wealthy in the name of economic development must continue.
And a majority of both the House and Senate want to keep the economic incentives being offered to attract big business to the state. The governor says those incentives have helped big time. But they aren't keeping us afloat economically.
Without some cuts in economic incentives, further cuts in people are the only answer. We know that state government has grown by 50 percent during the Richardson administration.
Our state budgets were running about $4 billion a year when the Richardson administration took over in 2003. By 2008 they were up to $6 billion. But that doesn't translate into a 50 percent increase in state employees.
Carter Bundy, a state employee union representative, dug out figures showing the number of state employees has grown from 22,933 to 24,715 during that period. But when compared to New Mexico's increase in population over that period, we have fewer state employees per capita now.
Cutting more people does not appear to be the right answer.
MON, 2-22-10

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

 

2-19 We Haven't Hit Bottom Yet

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- They just don't get it. New Mexico is in a Great Recession that won't be solved by quick fixes or nickel-and-dime fixes. And yet Santa Fe seems to be in denial.
I don't know how the Legislature ended yesterday but it doesn't matter. We are still at the beginning of a long road. We'll have many more special sessions and regular sessions before we're out of this hole.
Sooner or later our governor and lawmakers will have to face the fact that minor surgery is not going to cure our budget problems.
It didn't help that our revenue for next year was projected at a six-percent increase over this year. The rationale was that the economy is so bad now, it can't get any worse.
Well, it can. A forecast made last week showed that we haven't hit bottom yet. We'll need another $50 million just to make the current year's books balance.
You know what that's going to do to next year's budget. That $600 million hole they've been talking about has gotten even deeper. The answer to this major problem is some major solutions.
Instead our governor and lawmakers are arguing over whether to tax tortillas and eliminate double-dippers. That will produce about two handfuls of dirt to fill that gaping hole.
Granted, a big budget deficit is the ideal time to see if we're running government as efficiently as possible. Let's keep it up. But we must also be extra careful that our spending and our cuts make sense.
Since Gov. Bill Richardson took office in 2003, the state has spent over a billion dollars on economic development. The governor says the investment has paid off big time. Some of us aren't too sure.
It's too late to get our money back on some of the big items but other big outlays could be stopped. Film incentives have been questioned but beaten back by expertly produced protests.
New Mexico was one of the first states to take on Hollywood. It worked. So, many other states copied us. Some are granting even bigger incentives. Now they're wondering if they did the right thing but no one can figure out a foolproof way to measure it. We should keep trying.
The state also is doling out big sums to attract other business. At a time when nearly every public service is being cut, Gov. Richardson is asking for millions more to grant the wishes of Hewlett Packard and Fidelity Investments corporations.
So what happens if we start cutting back on our dole to those corporate giants? Will they leave? Did they come here for any reasons other than getting on the corporate dole? Maybe not.
A well-trained workforce always helps. Singapore, once so poor that no one wanted them, decided to become its own city-state and force the most rigorous education in the world on its children.
Companies now flock to Singapore for the best-trained workforce in the world. And their personal income is one of the highest in the world.
But our Legislature is cutting school budgets. One Senate Finance Committee proposal is to no longer fund 12th graders. Think of what that will do for our unemployment rate.
While the film industry receives many millions, the state Tourism Department, created to help out New Mexico's largest private-sector employer, is seeing over a 50 percent budget cut.
Prior to the Legislative session, all sectors of the tourism industry in New Mexico united behind a request to the Legislature for a small gross receipts tax on themselves to fund additional tourism promotion. It was an attempt to gain some ground on neighboring states which pour many times more into tourism promotion than New Mexico does.
Lawmakers killed it. After all, it was a tax. No matter that it was a tax on an industry willing to pass it on to tourists. And then they cut Tourism's $2.6 million budget down to $1 million.
Instead of New Mexico paying rich corporate giants millions to put a plant in our state, how about a little help for an industry already in our state that has a $1 billion payroll?
FRI, 2-19-10

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

 

2-17 Legislature Nears Final Day

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- As we predicted, last week's train wreck looks less imminent as the session's end approaches. Last weekend state senators crafted themselves a budget bill and declared themselves ready to talk to the House.
The talks aren't going smoothly. Public posturing is still the name of the game and likely still will be by the time you read this. But there's still time.
Lawmakers don't want to spend any more time up here than necessary. They aren't getting paid. They want to get home and back to earning a living.
Unfortunately the budgets passed by each house don't look much alike. The Senate made cuts the House didn't and passed a completely different set of taxes.
But if the Senate truly believes its mantra about everyone having to share the pain, it will finally back off its insistence that we still coddle the rich.
Whatever agreement the House and Senate hammer out, it isn't likely to plug the entire $650 million budget gap. Lawmakers know they will have to be back soon after the end of the current fiscal year , June 30.
It appears that not enough money was appropriated to balance this year's budget. So not only will $40 million more have to be appropriated for this year, it means the state revenue forecasters overestimated next year's revenues.
That means $650 million won't be enough to fill that hole in next year's budget. So it doesn't really matter much if we don't get that hole completely filled by tomorrow.
And whatever decisions this Legislature makes, they aren't the last word anyway. Recently Gov. Bill Richardson has been doing something never before tried by a chief executive. If he doesn't like parts of the Legislature's budget, he will veto them and then issue an executive order addressing the subject in his way.
It is unclear whether Gov. Richardson's reshaping of legislative actions by executive order is legal or constitutional. Executive orders never have been used to the extent Richardson has gone. The Legislature's only recourse appears to be to the courts. That has been discussed but no action has yet been taken.
If Gov. Richardson stays true to form, he is likely to scale back both budget cuts and tax increases. If he continues on that path the remainder of his term, which ends Dec. 31, he would leave it up to a new governor to do the dirty work next year.
* * *
A few years ago the International Astronomical Union decided Pluto is no longer a planet. That upset many New Mexicans because Pluto's discoverer, Dr. Clyde Tombaugh, spent the last 50 years of his life in Las Cruces, where he headed the New Mexico State University astronomy department until his retirement.
To celebrate the 80th anniversary of Pluto's discovery, Rep. Joni Marie Gutierrez, D-Dona Ana, has introduced a House Memorial declaring Feb. 18, 2010 as "Pluto is a Planet in New Mexico Day."
Tombaugh died in 1997. An ounce of his ashes is being carried on the New Horizons spacecraft, launched in 2006 and scheduled for a fly-by of Pluto in 2014.
HM 17 proclaims that thanks to Dr. Tombaugh, Pluto will always be considered a planet in New Mexico.
* * *
Valentine's Day this year was accompanied by more stories than usual about unusual gifts that go out of their way to express one's love. My award for the best gift this year goes to Kelly Egolf, of Santa Fe.
Her husband, freshman Rep. Brian Egolf, has introduced legislation requiring state funds be deposited in local New Mexico banks instead of the big national ones.
Egolf's proposal has gained popularity both here and nationally but few accounts have mentioned Egolf's name. So wife Kelly has sent a friendly reminder to the media suggesting that her husband be given a little credit.
WED, 2-17-10

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

 

2-15 corrections

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Ready or not, the New Mexico Legislature adjourns Thursday noon, Feb. 18. Several issues finally are moving. Unfortunately none of them involve the state budget.
Lawmakers like to get the budget to the governor at least three days before the session ends. That forces him to act on the measure before the end of the session, thereby allowing legislators to override any \vetoes he makes.
That's not going to happen this year. The three-day deadline arrives at noon Monday. Lawmakers have their ways of resolving budget battles at the last minute but that's not likely to happen this year because a special session is a surety anyway.
Federal money, on which some of the budget is predicated, has not yet been appropriated, so the amount to be received is not yet known. Also the state revenues available for this fiscal year are only estimated.
If all that revenue doesn't materialize, further sources must be found because the state is constitutionally prohibited from ending a fiscal year with an unbalanced budget.
So the Legislature is not forced into balancing this year's and next year's budgets immediately. Many other states are following the same pattern of remaining in session or calling special sessions in order to deal with the latest budget information.
At this point in the session, here is what the budget session looks like. Any talk of reinstituting any of the billion dollars of tax cuts since the beginning of Gov. Bill Richardson's administration has been squelched by the governor.
Consideration of any other tax hikes have been stopped by a coalition of all Republicans and conservative Democrats who hold leadership positions.
Gross receipts tax increases, which typically are the least onerous to Republicans, have been beaten back by progressive Democrats on the grounds that they are regressive.
That essentially leaves budget cuts as the only avenue to plugging the $650 million budget hole.
The budget savings discussed so far are the nickel-and-dime issues that irritate the heck out of people but which are in the single-digit millions of dollars that are not going to fill many holes.
Chief among these irritants are the exempt employees hired by Gov. Richardson. Reportedly over 500 have been hired. Lawmakers want to limit the Number to 400. The governor's office says there only are about 450 political appointees now because of vacancies. Figure the savings on each one eliminated at around $100,000.
Double dippers, who return to work after retiring and draw a pension check and a paycheck, are another popular target. Many lawmakers want to totally end the practice but there are legal problems with that. The resolution may be to eliminate the practice in the future.
Consolidation of departments, school districts and higher education institutions was recommended by the governor's efficiency task force. The Legislative Finance Committee has recommended eliminating special distributions to small, rural school districts. That may be the only action there.
Cutting film rebates, reducing the state motor pool, strict enforcement of the hiring freeze and elimination of a float in the Rose Parade all have been discussed but haven't gotten far.
The big ticket items left haven't been discussed much openly during the session but you can bet they are being considered behind closed doors.
They include another cut in public employee pay by way of a transfer of employer contributions to state and education pension funds. Last year the amount was 1.5 percent of pay. This year it is 2.64 percent of pay.
Also on the table are more furlough days for state employees. This year, it is five unpaid furlough days. Next year it could be as high as one day in each of the state's 26 pay periods. Some other states are up in that range already.
And there's also the possibility of more across-the-board cuts for all of state government, public schools and higher education.
MON, 2-15-10

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

Here is the corrected copy for the 2-15 column. Friday needs to be changed to Thursday in the first graf and Tues. to Mon. in the third.

 

At one time 30-day sessions ended on Friday. It had something to do with the way Sundays were counted.

 

It isn't what I forget that bothers me. It's what I remember for sure that isn't correct.

Legislature ends Thursday

    Please correct mistake made in 2-15 column.

2-10 Lawmakers Cut the Pork

WED, 2-10-10

SANTA FE - To the surprise of many, state senators voted overwhelmingly last Saturday to ax $130 million of pork projects that were approved in previous years but weren't going anywhere.
It is a sign of how seriously senators are taking the budget balancing process. This column has opined on several occasions that lawmakers must share the budget-deficit pain with taxpayers, public employees, schools and state agencies.
We suggested cutting legislative per diem and travel but cutting their pork will be much more painful because lawmakers believe that pork is what gets them reelected.
Pork money is for community projects but lawmakers think of it as theirs because they can take credit for bringing it home. And if the money is for a building, they might even get their name on it.
People who are closely tied to those local projects won't be happy with their senators who didn't go to the mat to save the projects. But senators don't have to run this year. It may be more difficult, however, for House members to vote for the cuts.
We may see a much closer vote on the pork withdrawal in the House because representatives all have to defend their seats this year.
But what do New Mexicans really want? Do they want those local projects more than they want a balanced state budget? Since the law requires a balanced budget, that means either more taxes or fewer government services.
Last year, a coalition of education groups commissioned a survey that found New Mexicans would prefer a tax increase to cuts in public schools. If that is what House members are hearing from their constituents now, they may pass the pork cuts easily also.
The elimination of pork projects constitutes less than 10 percent of the $1.4 billion of the stalled projects around the state. The projects included in this cut are those that never have gotten to the point of letting any kind of contract on them.
Amazingly there are some 1,500 such projects. What happens is that the amount of pork money allocated to each legislator often isn't enough to fund the total project. So the money sits there waiting for more to be added the following year. Often it takes several years to fully fund a project.
What a way to run a railroad. The states that have their act together have created agencies to analyze capital outlay needs statewide, prioritize them and then fund them beginning at the top of the list
Such a logical procedure is not likely to ever happen in New Mexico. Alan Hall, an Albuquerque attorney, has suggested an alternate procedure in which lawmakers could bank their pork money. Lawmakers could then borrow and lend from their accounts in a more orderly fashion.
Our current system of allocating capital outlay funds argues for setting legislative term limits. If pork money is so important to reelection, we should limit the number of times legislators can be reelected. In that way, legislators could focus more on what is good for the state rather than on taking home as much pork as possible.
In recent good economic times, over $1 billion of pork per year has been split up among each of the 112 legislators and the governor. That is money we certainly could use now to balance the state budget deficit of at least $600 million.
The vote in the Senate was 36-4 to take back $130 million of the $150 million originally in the take-back bill. The other $20 million was for projects that communities were able to produce sufficient documentation to indicate a contract already has been executed.
Four senators voiced objections to the cuts contending that rural and Navajo areas of the state received more than their share of cuts.
The current scarcity of building funds also presents an opportunity for the state to examine its tendency to overbuild.

 

From: Jay Miller

Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 6:24 PM

To: insidethecapitol@hotmail.com

Subject: 2-10

 

2-15 Lawmakers Running Out of Time

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- Ready or not, the New Mexico Legislature adjourns Friday noon, Feb. 19. Several issues finally are moving. Unfortunately none of them involve the state budget.
Lawmakers like to get the budget to the governor at least three days before the session ends. That forces him to act on the measure before the end of the session, thereby allowing legislators to override any \vetoes he makes.
That's not going to happen this year. The three-day deadline arrives at noon Tuesday. Lawmakers have their ways of resolving budget battles at the last minute but that's not likely to happen this year because a special session is a surety anyway.
Federal money, on which some of the budget is predicated, has not yet been appropriated, so the amount to be received is not yet known. Also the state revenues available for this fiscal year are only estimated.
If all that revenue doesn't materialize, further sources must be found because the state is constitutionally prohibited from ending a fiscal year with an unbalanced budget.
So the Legislature is not forced into balancing this year's and next year's budgets immediately. Many other states are following the same pattern of remaining in session or calling special sessions in order to deal with the latest budget information.
At this point in the session, here is what the budget session looks like. Any talk of reinstituting any of the billion dollars of tax cuts since the beginning of Gov. Bill Richardson's administration has been squelched by the governor.
Consideration of any other tax hikes have been stopped by a coalition of all Republicans and conservative Democrats who hold leadership positions.
Gross receipts tax increases, which typically are the least onerous to Republicans, have been beaten back by progressive Democrats on the grounds that they are regressive.
That essentially leaves budget cuts as the only avenue to plugging the $650 million budget hole.
The budget savings discussed so far are the nickel-and-dime issues that irritate the heck out of people but which are in the single-digit millions of dollars that are not going to fill many holes.
Chief among these irritants are the exempt employees hired by Gov. Richardson. Reportedly over 500 have been hired. Lawmakers want to limit the Number to 400. The governor's office says there only are about 450 political appointees now because of vacancies. Figure the savings on each one eliminated at around $100,000.
Double dippers, who return to work after retiring and draw a pension check and a paycheck, are another popular target. Many lawmakers want to totally end the practice but there are legal problems with that. The resolution may be to eliminate the practice in the future.
Consolidation of departments, school districts and higher education institutions was recommended by the governor's efficiency task force. The Legislative Finance Committee has recommended eliminating special distributions to small, rural school districts. That may be the only action there.
Cutting film rebates, reducing the state motor pool, strict enforcement of the hiring freeze and elimination of a float in the Rose Parade all have been discussed but haven't gotten far.
The big ticket items left haven't been discussed much openly during the session but you can bet they are being considered behind closed doors.
They include another cut in public employee pay by way of a transfer of employer contributions to state and education pension funds. Last year the amount was 1.5 percent of pay. This year it is 2.64 percent of pay.
Also on the table are more furlough days for state employees. This year, it is five unpaid furlough days. Next year it could be as high as one day in each of the state's 26 pay periods. Some other states are up in that range already.
And there's also the possibility of more across-the-board cuts for all of state government, public schools and higher education.
MON, 2-15-10

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

 

2-12 GOP Fills Statewide Slate

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- As predicted here, the state GOP has filled its slate of candidates for statewide office. On filing day, Feb. 9, Republican candidates for all statewide offices turned in the required number of nominating petition signatures to qualify their candidacies.
Republicans never have had difficulty finding candidates for governor, lieutenant governor and state land commissioner. This year's field features 13 candidates for those three positions.
But until very recently, no Republicans were interested in running for secretary of state, attorney general, auditor or treasurer. Minor parties, such as the Greens, sometimes have a better showing than that.
The lack of enthusiasm among GOP candidates about those offices is caused by Republicans' almost complete lack of success in winning those races over the last 80 years.
It is an interesting phenomenon. The GOP has been moderately successful at electing governors. If the voters who choose the Republican candidate for governor would stay in the same column for the down ballot races, they should be able to elect a moderate number of Republicans for those offices too.
Why do those voters switch over to the Democratic side of the ballot? It can't be due to those candidates always being so high quality.
Here's the list of recent GOP recruits. State Sen. Dianna Duran is running for secretary of state. That name will be familiar to some because Duran has filled that ballot slot before.
Running for attorney general is District Attorney Matt Chandler of Clovis. Chandler's father Caleb was a Democratic state senator and in the 1980s was the Democratic pick to take on U.S. Rep. Joe Skeen.
Errol Chavez, a former Drug Enforcement Administration agent will run for auditor and Jim Schoonover will run for state treasurer. Both Schoonover and Chavez are from Las Cruces, the largest city in the 2nd Congressional District, which could help Republican Steve Pearce in that race.
While some Democratic candidates for statewide office submitted several times the required number of nominating petition signatures, the next question will be whether the late-filing Republicans were able to collect sufficient valid signatures. Expect the Democratic incumbents in those four races to carefully check every signature.
Republican and Democratic candidates who got into their races early had a four-month head start over the late entries who only had one week to collect 1,060 valid signatures.
Democratic candidates for statewide office were required to collect 2,162 signatures. The amount depends on the parties' showings in the most recent gubernatorial election. Richardson piled up the largest victory margin ever.
One GOP candidacy turned out to be a surprise to most of us in the news business. Cliff R. Pirtle of Roswell will take on former U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce for the privilege of trying to unseat Rep. Harry Teague in the 2nd Congressional District.
Candidates don't normally like to have primary election opposition. But it isn't all bad. It is an opportunity to get one's name before the voters earlier than they otherwise would have done. And if Pearce wins a lop-sided victory, as expected, it provides momentum going into the general election.
The four Republican late-comers in the statewide races enter their campaigns with a fundraising disadvantage. Their opponents all are incumbents who likely have balances in their campaign war chests remaining from their 2006 victories. And they likely have been raising at least a little money ever since.
But the biggest disadvantage these four GOP candidates face is the low expectations that potential voters and donors have about their candidacies.
Unless Secretary of State Mary Herrera, Attorney General Gary King, Auditor Hector Balderas or Treasurer James Lewis falters badly in the next nine months, reelection is highly likely.
But it always could happen. Primary election problems, for instance, would hamper Herrera's chances. And if that happens, the GOP will have a candidate to take advantage of the situation.
FRI, 2-12-10

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

 

2-8 The Senate Is Supreme

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- Congratulations to the state Senate on its glorious basketball victory last week. It isn't often the Senate beats the House in basketball, what with its inferior numbers and advanced age.
There was a time, however, when the Senate was supreme, or so it was proclaimed by Sen. C.B. Trujillo of Taos. Trujillo was a big guy, who served back in the 1970s. He was a dominating basketball player and tried to do the same in the Senate.
In those days, the Senate used to win its share of basketball games. The following day, Trujillo would rise on the floor of the Senate to proclaim "The Senate is supreme."
Basketball victories weren't the only occasion on which Trujillo would shout his battle cry. It also happened when the House and Senate tangled over the general appropriations bill. Trujillo would rise to remind his Senate colleagues that the Senate is supreme.
Trujillo wasn't far off. Sen. Aubrey Dunn of Alamogordo was chairman of the Senate Finance Committee in those days. Dunn always seemed to have a trick up his sleeve when the appropriation bill arrived in his committee.
Just like today, the Senate was more conservative than the House and Dunn seemed to always see that the Senate came out on top, giving Trujillo one more opportunity to stand and shout "The Senate is supreme."
Will the Senate be supreme again this year? Between Republicans and conservative Democrats, it appears the Senate is not going to be open to any reinstated taxes or other taxes of any kind.
Sen. John Arthur Smith, D-Deming, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, charges that the House wants the Senate to be the bad guys by stopping all tax increases.
Maybe Smith has some tricks up his sleeve just like the Aubrey Dunn of old. Does stopping all tax increases really make senators bad people? Does that mean Smith secretly plans to agree to tax increases, thereby making senators good people? You got me.
We now are at that point in a legislative session when many lawmakers and nearly all staff, lobbyists and media begin predicting a train wreck. Nothing appears to be moving. A special session is a certainty.
This session will adjourn at noon a week from Friday. It is very likely that that a special session will be necessary because of the uncertainty of federal funding and state revenue projections.
But plugging the budget gap to the tune of several hundred million dollars now will make it much easier to develop necessary budget adjustments later.
It is likely that House and Senate finance leaders already are talking far behind the scenes about possibilities for end-game compromise. These same people work side by side during the interim between legislative sessions on the Legislative Finance Committee. They aren't strangers. They just don't want to tip their hands too soon.
Since the beginning of this session, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have been accusing each other of being in denial about how they will have to give ground in order to get out of our difficult situation.
But there are signs that both sides realize they will have to work together to make things different this year. The number of bills introduced this session is only half the number introduced in the last 30-day session and one-third the number introduced in the short session before that. They know they must concentrate on the big stuff.
And then there was the recent sex-filled piece in the University of New Mexico student newspaper which some lawmakers found offensive -- and likely all lawmakers read.
Forty years ago, a similar situation raised such a ruckus that Sen. Harold Runnels was able to use it to get elected to Congress.
This year mention of the UNM Daily Lobo column prompted comments in a confirmation committee hearing but no one seems to be making it campaign fodder.
MON, 2-08-10

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

 

2-05 Everything Stops For Super Bowl

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist
SANTA FE -- The Super Bowl has become too big to ignore, even during what may be the most important legislative session ever. Lawmakers certainly don't ignore the Super Bowl.
Normally legislators put in a hard day's work on the next to last Sunday of a legislative session. But when a Super Bowl falls on that day, don't expect any floor sessions or committee meetings.
Gov. Bill Richardson also will be otherwise occupied. A huge sports fan, he hides out with about 20 friends at his favorite annual Super Bowl party in a room specially designated for cigars.
Of course 2008 was an exception. Former President Bill Clinton had asked to talk about Hillary's candidacy and Richardson suggested they watch the Super Bowl together at the governors' mansion. Houseboat racer Brian Condit also was present. A week later, Richardson endorsed Barack Obama.
Public servants really can't be blamed for calling a time out from their activities to become part of this national obsession. President Richard Nixon got so involved he called Miami Dolphins head coach Don Shula to suggest a play he believed would work against the Dallas Cowboys. It didn't.
It is reported that the last time Green Bay was in the Super Bowl, local police in the area, who had to work that day, stopped people on the street and threatened a ticket unless they could provide an explanation why they weren't watching the game.
Super Bowls have become the biggest single sporting events in the world. They are the most popular televised event every year. Over 100 million watch in the United States, almost half of them are women. One billion watch worldwide in 232 countries.
Thirty-second Super Bowl commercials now sell for $6 million. The game has become a showcase for premiering the newest and best ads. An estimated 59 percent of viewers elect to take bathroom breaks during the game rather than miss the commercials.
Besides commercials, the main Super Bowl attraction for a great many is the food. During the regular season, men often are the chief cooks at home-game tailgating parties in the parking lot. But on Super Sunday, women definitely get in the picture with some fancy home entertaining.
Research studies indicate sports bars are popular during the regular season but only four percent of the viewing public chooses them for watching the Super Bowl.
Thirteen percent go for delivery or takeout. But the other 83 percent cook up a storm at home and invite the neighbors. An estimated 20 million pounds of potato chips and tortilla chips are served that day along with 8 million pounds of avocados.
Many fans get much more imaginative, however. The Food Network now has over a dozen shows with Super Bowl themes during the week before the game. One report featured a couple who turned their dining room table into a stadium built out of 14,000 calories of snack food.
During the last two weeks of January, ads are everywhere offering to send you footballs made out of sausage, cheese, marshmallows, crisped rice and who knows what else. Every table needs a centerpiece.
So why the hysteria over a football game? Anthropologists tell us the game of football is a reinforcement of everything American -- especially when we're talking American males and the biggest game of the year.
Two tribes of men clad in armor and colorful uniforms try to take each other's territory. It's not just about scoring points, it's about taking territory with blitzes, bombs and sacks down in the trenches.
We're told that professional football inspires feelings of watching gladiators in a coliseum, military maneuvers and a cockfight combined in one event.
How can one argue with the chicken fighting analogy when one sees combatants celebrate even minor triumphs by strutting around to celebrate their achievements?
It's an enchanting spectacle so you might as well join in. Nothing else will be happening.
FRI, 2-05-10

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

 

2-3 Tax Cuts and Increases Can Be Temporary

By JAY MILLER
Syndicated Columnist

SANTA FE -- On opening day of the 2010 Legislature, former Gov. Gary Johnson carried a sign outside the state Capitol saying "No such thing as a temporary tax."
It has become a trendy saying among Republicans and conservative Democrats this session. House Majority Whip Keith Gardner, of Roswell, went one better by declaring "There's nothing more permanent than a temporary tax increase."
It's a take off on a popular remark after World War II about military barracks buildings that local communities decided to keep around "temporarily."
But there are such things as temporary tax increases. Gov. Bill Richardson likes to brag that he has eliminated a billion dollars in taxes since the beginning of his administration. That made the former tax increases temporary taxes.
Back in 2003, when most of that $1 billion of taxes were cut, some Democrats wanted to make the cuts temporary. But euphoria about having a governor who already was off wooing big international companies to relocate in New Mexico prevented that handful of Democrats from inserting what they called a circuit breaker in the tax cut bills.
The circuit breakers would have reinstated the taxes when New Mexico ever faced another deficit. Back then we were riding high and Richardson promised the tax cuts would attract enough businesses with high-paid employees to more than make up for the tax cuts.
It didn't happen. And now we're really in a mess. The governor, all Republicans and conservative Democrats are insisting that those tax cuts, made during the good times, must remain permanent even though they would solve our present situation.
Both tax cuts and tax increases can be temporary. Many of the same lawmakers who insist all tax increases are sure to become permanent also love to put sunset clauses on any legislation they don't like.
So all tax increase legislation passed by this Legislature could contain a sunset clause directing that as soon as the state ends a year with surplus revenue, that tax increase would disappear.
Why is Gov. Richardson insisting that his billion dollars of tax cuts become permanent, at least for the rest of his administration. It is to protect his tax-cutting legacy. And his traditional enemies are helping him do it.
One way to create a stable tax structure, which doesn't have frequent hikes and cuts, is to establish a special fund into which surpluses would be placed every year that the states ends up in the black. There wouldn't be any piddling rebates to every taxpayer. That money would go into a special fund to be used in deficit years.
It would truly be a rainy day fund that would be triggered automatically depending on whether the state ends up with a surplus or a deficit.
It sounds good but the likely tendency would be to spend all the money rather than tuck it away for a rainy day. Americans aren't good at saving. But we also have lawmakers who like to assure that money isn't just tucked away. They want it locked away.
Back during a previous energy boom, from 1974 to 1982, the Severance Tax Fund was created for just the purpose I have mentioned. But after a few years, lawmakers decided to lock it up much like our state's Land Grant Permanent Fund.
Maybe we should try again -- if we ever see another state surplus. The hole at the end of the tunnel hasn't appeared yet but experience tells us it always does. Although when we get to that point, we always seem to discover new needs the state should address.
Deficit years give us an opportunity to decide whether the new programs we decided were so important really are that necessary. It wouldn't be a bad idea to go back and look at a state budget from 50 or 60 years ago and see what government services we thought we could live with then.
WED, 2-03-10

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