Richardson's acceptance of massive gifts gives senators an excuse to ignore ethics reform proposals

Posted 3/13/2007 03:45:00 PM

Gov. Bill Richardson continues to give lawmakers grounds to believe his ethics reform proposals are hypocritical.

In doing so, he’s giving them an excuse to oppose reform.

The Associated Press is reporting that legislation heading to the governor for a signature would give $4 million for a road project sought by a major Richardson donor – one whose campaign contributions would be illegal under legislation the governor has proposed.

Richardson wants to ban gifts with a value of more than $250, except during legislative sessions, when gifts with a value of more than $100 would be banned. He wants to limit campaign contributions to $2,300 per individual per election cycle.

Versions of Richardson’s gift ban have been approved by the House and Senate. Contribution limits have been approved by the House and are on the Senate calendar for consideration.

Despite his opposition to such massive gifts, Richardson accepted contributions totaling $75,000 from Coast Range Investments for his re-election campaign last year. He also accepted airline travel valued at $10,000 from the company in his role as chair of the Democratic Governor’s Association.

The airline travel wouldn’t be subject to the state reform proposals, but the reasons to limit such gifts still apply.

The capital outlay bill approved by lawmakers on Monday includes funding to upgrade the Interstate 25 interchange near Belen, where the donor plans a 6,000-acre project, the news service reported.

The massive gifts the company gave you will make your approval of this funding questionable, governor. It’s why you’re proposing the limits on contributions and gifts, remember?

Amanda Cooper, Richardson’s re-election campaign manager and current staffer for his presidential campaign, gave this tired statement to the news service:

“The governor does not make any decisions or is not impacted by ay contributions, whether that’s a money contribution or event or whatever,” she said.

With all due respect to Cooper, there’s an obvious contraction here: The governor believes other politicians in the state can be influenced by contributions and gifts. If that weren’t the case, why would he fight for limits?

Despite that, Richardson appears to somehow think he’s above temptation.

Politicians are human. That’s why massive gifts should be illegal.

I know Richardson is quite confident in his own abilities, but I don’t see any reason to believe he is a god who is immune to the human temptations other politicians face.

Yet it’s hard to explain his hypocrisy any other way. That’s part of the reason many of his ethics reform proposals are getting a cold shoulder in the Senate.

If the session ends without significant ethics reform, Richardson will share the blame.