Meet this site's new progressive columnist

Posted 5/31/2007 04:32:00 PM

When I announced last week that Whitney Cheshire would join this site as a weekly columnist, I said the conservative Wednesday Morning Quarterback would be balanced by a progressive writer.

Meet Carter Bundy, who will write a weekly column called Left @ Albuquerque.

You might recall Bundy writing a guest column on immigration last week. He is the political and legislative director for AFSCME in New Mexico and a recovering lawyer who left the bright lights of New York for the 2000 Gore campaign and now lives in Albuquerque.

Bundy will be writing from his own perspective, not that of AFSCME.

He and Cheshire actually know each other well and should have some good political and policy debates on this site. Both columns will run on Wednesdays. Cheshire started this week. Bundy will start next week.

Your feedback and ideas are always welcome. E-mail me at heath@haussamen.com.

- Heath Haussamen

Brunner says he isn't running for Congress

Posted 5/31/2007 03:59:00 PM

Terry Brunner, state director for the office of U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., has decided he won’t run for Congress next year.

Brunner had been considering running against U.S. Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., but said he is happy with the other candidates considering the race. The only Democrat to officially be in the running is Albuquerque City Councilor Martin Heinrich.

“I see some great people stepping up and getting in to the race, and I think the important thing is that we have a great candidate,” Brunner told me.

While we’re on the topic, the Rothenberg Political Report has a new analysis of New Mexico’s First Congressional District race. Check it out by clicking here.

In wake of tragedy, Anthony considers incorporation

Posted 5/31/2007 02:25:00 PM

The impoverished community of Anthony, fresh off two tragedies that have galvanized residents, is talking seriously about incorporation, the Las Cruces Sun-News is reporting.

A month ago, a 13-year-old boy was killed in a car crash that was caused by a missing stop sign. More recently, a teen trying to clean up his life was murdered in a gang-related shooting.

Many residents are bitter at the only government they can blame, Doña Ana County. In some ways, they’re justified: In the late 1990s and early part of this decade, some commissioners worked for political and other reasons to encourage businesses that looked at Anthony to instead locate in Santa Teresa, where the county has worked for years to try to build a new city.

At the same time, situations only really improve when residents become involved. Voter turnout in Anthony has almost always been dismal. It’s one of the poorest communities around, even as its alter ego on the other side of the state line, Anthony, Texas, has improved the economic situation of its residents because it is incorporated.

In 2000, the Census found that Anthony, N.M., had 7,904 residents, and 38 percent were living below the poverty level.

There is some commercial and industrial development in Anthony that could generate revenue. Incorporation would force residents to stand up and take responsibility for the community’s poverty. It would also give them the means to organize and better attract growth and solve problems.

There is some groundwork for incorporation in place. The Anthony area has a public water and sanitation district and a non-profit economic development group.

Incorporation may be the next logical step.

City wants transparency to keep up with technology

Posted 5/31/2007 11:06:00 AM

The City of Las Cruces, in an effort to ensure its transparency keeps up with technology, is exploring whether councilors should be allowed to use cell phones, laptop computers and other communication devices during council meetings.

Coming from a council whose illegal action led several years ago to the formal definition in New Mexico of a “rolling quorum,” it’s a valiant effort to tackle an interesting and difficult issue.

In 2002, then-Mayor Ruben Smith met with five of six councilors separately and convinced them to sign a letter asking the city ethics board to investigate possible violations by then-Councilor Bill Mattiace. The letter led to an eventual reprimand.

The Las Cruces-Sun-News sued, arguing that the mayor and a majority of councilors, though they didn’t physically meet in one place, made a decision, as a group, outside the legal forum of a public meeting. A district judge agreed, and “rolling quorums” became illegal.

Mattiace, who has made open government his focus, later became mayor. It was Mattiace who, at Tuesday’s meeting of the council, expressed concern about whether councilors communicating with constituents or others by using electronic devices during meetings violated the New Mexico Open Meetings Act, or at least the spirit of openness.

But it isn’t just Mattiace who is pushing the city to address the issue. According to an article in today’s Sun-News, all councilors, the city attorney and manager say the issue is worth exploring.

Mattiace raised the question because at least one councilor communicated with a constituent via e-mail while the council discussed The Vistas at Presidio on May 21.

“Everything that is said and done by this council should be open record,” Mattiace said, according to the Sun-News. “The decision made here should made by council members who have done their research, their homework and not because they’ve been coached from the outside. When you go out on a stage like this, they shouldn’t be lip synching.”

The move by Mattiace has a political dimension, of course. It’s Councilor Ken Miyagishima, who may run against Mattiace this year, who is accused of communicating by text message and e-mail during the meeting. Miyagishima, who says he received only one message – it was from his wife – was the lone opponent of the massive development.

He also sent an e-mail to one constituent during the meeting. And he used his computer during the meeting to research some housing issues that were being discussed.

Not illegal, but still a gray area

The attorney general’s office told the Sun-News the e-mail wasn’t likely a violation of state law because the act doesn’t address such forms of communication during meetings. But Bob Johnson, director of the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government, said it should.

“Everything that happens in a public meeting, where issues of concern to the public are discussed, are supposed to be audible,” Johnson told the Sun-News. “At best, an action like that from an elected official is unethical. At worst, it’s a violation of the Open Meetings Act.”

He raises a valid point. During public meetings, should councilors be able to discuss issues with constituents or others with an interest in their deliberations without the public knowing about it?

Councilors are joined by members of the Las Cruces Public Schools Board of Education, New Mexico State University Board of Regents and Doña Ana County Board of Commissioners in using laptops during meetings. I’d be lying if I said I had never communicated with an elected official using e-mail while he or she was participating in a meeting.

At the same time, computers have become a critical tool for receiving information. It was great that Miyagishima was able to find housing information he sought during the meeting.

You can’t really take computers out of the picture. They’re a part of daily life. So the question, then, is how to change open meetings law to account for computers and other communication devices?

It’s an issue no other governmental agency in New Mexico has raised, the attorney general’s office told the Sun-News, but it’s an interesting one. Government often does a bad job of keeping policies relevant in light of the newest technology. The city council has an opportunity to get ahead of this issue and ensure that government remains transparent.

I’m not sure what the right answer is, but I’m glad city officials are discussing it.

A prior version of this article incorrectly stated that the council met Monday.

Richardson to meet with Jesse Jackson's group

Posted 5/31/2007 09:55:00 AM

A day after participating in CNN’s Democratic presidential candidate debate on Sunday, Gov. Bill Richardson will head to another event that should earn him some attention.

He will be in Chicago on Monday morning to address the RainbowPUSH Coalition, led by Rev. Jesse Jackson. After the event, he’ll hold a news conference with Jackson, according to a news release from the Richardson campaign.

Maybe he’ll secure some high-profile endorsements in the black community to make up for the fact that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, one of the most visible Hispanics in the nation, announced yesterday his endorsement of Hillary Clinton.

Richardson plans to spend Monday afternoon and evening fundraising in Phoenix.

Sunshine reduces conflicts of interest in government

Posted 5/31/2007 01:54:00 AM

By Dr. James “Jim” Kadlecek

“The citizen can bring our political and governmental institutions back to life, make them responsive and accountable, and keep them honest. No one else can.” - John Gardner, founder of Common Cause

Lately, there have been accusations flying back and forth about conflicts of interest involving public officials.

Some say state Land Commissioner Pat Lyons has a conflict of interest because he accepted a campaign donation from a local developer and later gave that developer a state land contract on the East Mesa of Las Cruces.

Some say city Councilor Gil Jones has a conflict of interest because his brother is married to the sister of the wife of a local developer who regularly seeks development approvals from the council.

County Commissioner Bill McCamley has been accused of a conflict of interest because he voted on a development proposal brought forth by someone who donated to his campaign.

Councilor Jose Frietze is regularly accused of conflicts of interest because his large non-profit corporation, FYI, receives federal funds through the city community development department for some of its programs.

A former mayor and county commission chairman have both been accused of rewarding friends and relatives with city contracts and favors.

Some wonder (myself included) if there were side deals involved when the city and county sold our public hospital several years ago. It was a tragically mistaken public policy decision which still makes no sense to me, but were there conflicts of interest?

I suppose if we thoroughly researched the matter, few local elected officials would escape accusations of conflicts of interest during their public service. However, when you closely examine most of these allegations, there have rarely turned out to be actual conflicts.

Often, officials are accused of conflicts because citizens are angry at them for casting votes they didn’t like. Sometimes, because of the fact that we are still a relatively small community where lots of people know each other (and many seem to be related), it’s a sort of guilt-by-association thing. Sometimes, it is not a true conflict, but something that looks suspicious, usually because the official failed to disclose some business or family relationship.

The public believes there is a problem

Having said all that, we must admit that there is a problem if the public believes there is one. All polls reveal that the public’s confidence in its elected officials is low and not improving. So, let’s examine this topic.

What is a “conflict of interest?” What standards should we demand of our elected officials? Are there laws governing the behavior of elected officials? Are there codes of ethics?

New Mexico statute 10-16-3 delineates “ethical principles of public service.” It prohibits the “use of the powers and resources of public office… to obtain personal benefits or (to) pursue private benefits incompatible with the public interest.” The statute requires “full disclosure of real or potential conflicts of interest.” And it states that “no legislator, public officer or employee can request or receive, and no person may offer any money or thing of value, or promise thereof that is conditioned upon or given in exchange for promised performance of an official act.”

In short, it’s a felony to try to buy or sell votes or actions of public officials or employees.

So a conflict of interest exists when an elected official or a public employee does or will personally and directly benefit financially because of his or her actions in carrying out the official duties of office or position.

The best solution is sunshine

In addition to the law, there are several codes of ethics that regulate conduct. County commissioners recently strengthened their code of ethics. I’m told the city has a similar policy. There is an American Association of Public Administration code of ethics for public managers, as well as codes for the various professions.

Given all that, have we done everything we can to reduce conflicts of interest? The answer is clearly “No.” Conflicts, potential conflicts and suspicion of conflicts exist for several reasons. Among them are:

• Lack of enforcement. No independent body exists to enforce the law. District attorneys are reluctant to pursue punitive actions against other elected officials. These cases are often complex and the conflicts are subtle, indirect and hard to prove. That means they are costly to investigate and prosecute. Note the Vigil state treasurer trial. The governor and others have proposed an ethics commission, which is a good idea, if it is truly independent.

• Lack of understanding and education. I have taught government classes at the university and community college level for about 25 years. My students, of all ages, are generally not well informed about the basics of democracy and the functioning of governments at local, state and national levels. Most of them never had a government or politics class in high school. I’m told that most schools no longer require such courses. A better informed, educated and attentive citizenry would lessen the likelihood of conflicts of interest.

• Politics and Money. For congressional races, it is clear that to win election, you must raise and spend a lot of money. In nearly 90 percent of such contests, the candidate who spends the most wins. This phenomenon is becoming more and more true even at the state and local level. Interest groups use their campaign contributions to buy access to elected officials, and indirectly to influence voting decisions. The unpleasant but necessary answer to this is strict limitations on spending and public financing of campaigns.

We will probably always have some elected officials and government employees who will be tempted to use their powers in ways that are self-serving. The best overall solution to minimize this is to keep government as open and transparent as possible. When the light of the press and public shines fully and brightly on the activities of government, the likelihood of mischief is reduced. Not eliminated, but reduced. Sunshine, disclosure, open meetings, free and full information – those are the important concepts that lead to better government.

Kadlecek has lived in Doña Ana County since 1996, served in the Colorado Legislature and holds a doctorate in public administration. He’s the author of the book “Capitol Rape.” His column runs on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month and other times that he gets fired up about something.

Domenici explains vote to continue war funding

Posted 5/30/2007 03:06:00 PM

In a blog posting today on The Hill, U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., explains and defends his vote last week to continue to fund the Iraq war.

He wrote that he cast his vote with “great relief” because the bill will “clothe, arm, and otherwise support our troops in the battlefield.”

Check it out when you have a minute.

Democrats off to quick start in online fundraising

Posted 5/30/2007 02:46:00 PM

At least two Democrats trying to unseat New Mexico’s Republican representatives in Washington, D.C. are off to a quick start in raising money online.

Bill McCamley, who is trying to unseat U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce, R-N.M., has received 17 contributions totaling $5,395 through ActBlue, an online contribution Web site for Democratic candidates. Martin Heinrich, who wants the seat held by Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., has received 31 contributions totaling $4,450.

The site is an example of how Democrats have effectively used the Internet to organize in ways the GOP has missed. Pearce has a campaign Web site up, but people can’t contribute to through it. They have to print out a form and mail it in. Wilson doesn’t currently have a campaign site.

McCamley and Heinrich, on the other hand, can accept contributions online. Other sites, such as New Mexico FBIHOP, also have links to donate to Democratic candidates including McCamley and Heinrich.

Al Kissling, the other Democrat vying for the right to take on Pearce, has received five contributions totaling $105 through ActBlue.

We’re talking about relatively small amounts of money, but we’re still about 17 months away from the election, and the fundraising totals can tell us something about the campaigns, especially since Heinrich and McCamley didn’t get into the races until the second fundraising quarter of 2007 and haven’t yet had to file finance reports.

It’s likely that only a small percentage of their total fundraising will come through online contributions. Heinrich said recently that he has contributions totaling more than $50,000, and, based on his online fundraising total, it’s likely that McCamley does, too.

It’s expected that, if he gets past the primary, Heinrich will be one of the most well-funded Democrats seeking a GOP House seat in 2008, because the race is one that’s always in play. It is automatic that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, the fundraising arm of House Democrats, will help the candidate that emerges from that primary, if there is one.

McCamley and other candidates challenging Pearce, on the other hand, face an uphill battle just to get the attention of the DCCC. If McCamley raises a decent amount of money by July – say $100,000 or $200,000 – he should have the attention of Democrats in Washington, especially since Pearce has already sent out a fundraising letter indicating that he fears the involvement of the DCCC.

Kissling, on the other hand, filed a first-quarter finance report that indicated his campaign still has debt from 2006. If ActBlue is any indication, McCamley is raising money much faster than Kissling.

We’ll know more in mid-July, when finance reports for the second quarter are due.

For comparison on the fundraising totals, Kissling raised $26,771 through ActBlue for his unsuccessful attempt to unseat Pearce last year. That came from 309 donors. Patricia Madrid, who was unsuccessful in her attempt to unseat Wilson, raised $34,823 from 603 donors. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., raised $1,881 from 144 donors.

In total, Kissling raised about $186,000. Madrid raised about $3.4 million, and Bingaman raised $3.3 million.

The other members of the state’s delegation who are up for re-election next year are Democratic Rep. Tom Udall and GOP Sen. Pete Domenici. Neither has a campaign Web site up yet. Udall is registered on ActBlue, but has not yet received any contributions through the site.

One of two lesser-known Domenici challengers, Jim Hannan, has registered on ActBlue, but hasn’t yet received a contribution through the site.

Swickard's interviews now available online

Posted 5/30/2007 10:52:00 AM

The Morning Show with Michael Swickard has been podcasting portions of shows for a couple of months. Earlier this week, U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce was on the show, and today, one of his Democratic challengers in 2008, Bill McCamley, was on.

Swickard frequently tackles political issues. Check out the podcasts when you get a chance by clicking here.

New polls confirm Richardson's support in Iowa and New Hampshire, lack of support in South Carolina

Posted 5/30/2007 10:20:00 AM

Gov. Bill Richardson is holding steady in Iowa and New Hampshire in two new polls, but his support in South Carolina is dismal.

The newest polls by American Research Group have Richardson at 9 percent in New Hampshire and 8 percent in Iowa, which puts him in fourth place in both states. His support in South Carolina, however, is only 1 percent. He’s tied for last place in that state and is well below the margin of error.

April polls done by the group had Richardson at 5 percent in Iowa and 3 percent in New Hampshire. Richardson’s lack of support in South Carolina has been consistent since he jumped into the presidential race in January.

Those three states are among the five that currently have presidential nominating contests scheduled for January 2008. Richardson has focused most of his time and almost all his money in Iowa and New Hampshire.

The newest polls each surveyed 600 likely Democratic caucus goers between May 23 and 26, so they were conducted before Richardson’s Sunday performance on NBC’s Meet the Press. Though I thought he held his own on the show, most pundits thought Richardson’s performance was mediocre at best, and Slate even said he “self-destructed.”

Each of the new polls has a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

The new polls reflect the growing support for Richardson shown by other polls in Iowa and New Hampshire. Earlier this month, two other polls had Richardson at 9 and 10 percent in Iowa, and another had him at 10 percent in New Hampshire.

The newest poll by the group has Hillary Clinton in the lead in Iowa with 31 percent, while other polls have shown John Edwards leading in that state and Clinton in third place.

That’s important because Clinton is leading in most primary polls in other states. Winning Iowa is critical to Edwards’ candidacy. He’s in second in Iowa with 25 percent in the newest poll. Barack Obama is in third with 11 percent – not too far ahead of Richardson.

Clinton leads in New Hampshire with 34 percent to Edwards’ 18 percent and Obama’s 15 percent. She also has 34 percent in South Carolina, while Edwards has 30 percent and Obama has 18 percent.

Most of the new polls released this month in Iowa and New Hampshire show Richardson within striking distance of the third-place candidate in those states. Another significant jump and he could be among the three frontrunners, instead of nipping at their heels.

Since the first polls reflected growing support in those two states earlier this month, Richardson has increased his advertising. However, the next polls will take into account Richardson’s Meet the Press performance and his upcoming performance at this weekend’s second Democratic presidential candidate debate in New Hampshire.

Duke City starts experiment in public financing

Posted 5/30/2007 12:50:00 AM

Today marks the start of a weekly column on this site written by Whitney Cheshire, a conservative New Mexico campaign consultant. If you missed last week’s announcement, read it by clicking here.

By Whitney Cheshire

The Duke City starts its experiment in taxpayer-funded campaigns this year –

But does anybody want to guess about the Mayor Marty Chávez factor? We’ve got some good Albuquerque stuff for you today…

YO!

You’ve found the WMQB at our new home. We’re sure happy to be here! We’ve swept off the welcome mat, planted a geranium by the front door… and YES! The living room couch still feels the same.

So welcome!

As of this morning, 10 candidates running for the Albuquerque City Council could use taxpayer money for their campaigns this year.

This is the first year that Albuquerque candidates can take part in this TRAVESTY of a public policy.

The District 8 seat is being vacated by Councilor Craig Loy and, so far, only one candidate – Trudy Jones – has announced her intention to run. But, thankfully, she’s an R who didn’t file any paperwork for the publicly funded program.

That leaves 10 candidates spread out over three districts…

Maybe we should be happy that there are only 10, since anyone who qualifies for financing gets financing, and the price tag is around $25,000 per person, to start.

So here’s our first WMQB prediction from Heath’s place – in two years, the number of candidates who seek public financing for city office will double.

At least…

And we’ll ALL be paying for it, whether we like them or not.

Anyway, to qualify, candidates have to collect about 300-350 individual contributions from voters in their district - five bucks each – and they only have one month to get it done. This requires no small amount of work. Banging on doors to get petition signatures is one thing. Asking people to go back inside and take out the wallets is an entirely different animal.

Should we call it a BEAR?

The difficulty factor is about the only good thing we can say about this new law.

But as of this morning, three candidates for District 2 are still “collecting,” and two will likely get it done – Council President Debbie O’Malley and challenger Katherine Martinez.

District 4 incumbent R Brad Winter won’t seek tax money to run his race, but his opponent, Paulette de Pascal, is turning in her qualifying contributions, a move which in itself could doom her candidacy in the heavily republican Northeast Heights district.

In other words, de Pascal might need that $25,000 to explain to conservative voters why she wanted that $25,000.

District 6 apparently likes this public money thing. Six different candidates have announced their intention to go for it. Councilor Martin Heinrich will likely be vacating the seat for a congressional run, leaving the number at five.

Right now, Rey Garduño has already qualified for public funds, and Joan Griffin isn’t far behind.

Mayor might be playing in council races

So is that it??

Not really.

This year’s election is gearing up to be a BIG Mayor-Chávez-versus-THE-COUNCIL type of showdown, a classic example of the executive branch trying to stack the legislative branch in its favor.

Remember the streetcar tax stuffing that Chávez took this year? Or his lost pandas and special ornamental park?

He could use some more friendly votes on the council, no?

Chávez is rumored to be pulling the strings of certain campaigns – namely those of Martinez in District 2, de Pascal in District 4 and Griffin in District 6. How vocal and obvious Chávez becomes in these races will likely depend on his candidates’ individual abilities to perform, with the first do-or-die task being qualifying for those public dollars by tomorrow.

Will Chávez disavow any that fail?

Probably.

As of today, de Pascal seems to be struggling the most out of the three. It could be that she hasn’t been given the help she expected, or she could be fighting an uphill battle at “the door” in what is a fairly conservative district – one that not only elected incumbent Winter on two previous occasions, but one in which most voters probably have philosophical objections to publicly financed campaigners.

And like radio show host Jim Villanucci quipping on the air that Chávez’s most-hated season of the year is “Winter,” most ABQ politicos see the District 4 match up as an opportunity for Chávez to pound away on Winter without any real expectations of wresting the seat away from him.

Recorded phone messages about this year’s budget votes – messages that skirt the edge of reality - have already been launched into Winter’s district and are a clear indication that third-party groups, organized by some MYSTERIOUS stakeholders, have already started to form and will likely be active until October.

Our point?

If de Pascal manages to get her public dollars, she’ll spend about $25,000 of OUR money to wage a battle that no one we’ve spoken to thinks she can actually win, and her candidacy will give Chávez the open door he needs to continue his public relations war against one of those councilors who bugs him so darn much.

After all, it’s not much fun to criticize a sitting official when he or she is running unopposed…

So here’s our WMQB pledge of the day – if de Pascal fails to meet the qualification hurtle this week, we will raise a glass and toast the writers of this HA-RI-BLE city law (that Chávez signed – thank you very much) for their foresight in making it QUITE DIFFICULT to get those funds, and we’ll honestly tout it as a darn fine component of any possible public financing bill that may show up in Legislature 2008.

And if de Pascal DOES get ‘er done?

The WMQB pledges to recruit republican candidates to run in those heavily democratic districts for the 2009 city elections. They’ll lose, BUT OH THE FUN WE COULD HAVE WITH $25,000 EACH!!!!

OK!

Our e-mail’s the same. Send the tips, comments, quips and COMPLAINTS to wednesdaymorningqb@comcast.net.

See you next Wednesday…

Cheshire, AKA the Wednesday Morning Quarterback, is a media relations and campaign consultant in Albuquerque. Her column runs every Wednesday. You can learn more about her by clicking here.

Former magistrate wants to collect unemployment

Posted 5/29/2007 04:13:00 PM

Former Doña Ana County Magistrate Judge Carlos Garza, who was removed by the Supreme Court last year after testing positive for cocaine, is trying to draw unemployment from the state.

The Administrative Office of the Courts is fighting Garza’s attempt.

The high court removed Garza from the bench in November after the Judicial Standards Commission found that he had used cocaine and abused his position to benefit a woman with whom he had a personal relationship.

Unemployment applications aren’t public record, so most details of Garza’s attempt to collect unemployment from the state aren’t known, but Arthur Pepin, director of the AOC, confirmed that his office is “resisting his attempt to collect unemployment, and we expect the situation to be resolved in the next two to three weeks.”

Garza refused to comment.

In addition to removing him from his elected position, the high court ordered Garza to pay $16,760 to the commission for reimbursement of the costs of its investigation and barred him from ever again seeking or holding judicial office in New Mexico.

Carlos Castañeda, spokesman for the Department of Labor, said he can’t release information about specific cases. The AOC is paying counsel to represent it in the matter, which probably means one side or the other is contesting the original decision of the department, whether it was to accept or deny Garza’s application.

Pepin’s comment seems to indicate that a hearing will take place in the next few weeks.

The department’s Web site states that applicants will only be approved for benefits if “it is determined you were not fired for misconduct connected with your work, or if you can prove your reason for quitting was due to an unresolved work-related problem caused by the employer.”

Though Garza repeatedly pointed the finger at the commission, court administration and other judges while he fought to keep his job, the Supreme Court didn’t buy his arguments.

Those approved for unemployment benefits can receive them for up to one year if they remain unemployed but continue actively seeking employment.

Richardson holds his own during TV grilling

Posted 5/29/2007 03:14:00 PM

Gov. Bill Richardson took a beating on Sunday from the host of NBC’s Meet The Press, but he managed to stay calm and composed and held his own during a tough round of questioning.

All things considered, I don’t think he’ll gain in the polls as a result of the hour-long interview, but I also don’t think he’s going to lose support.

Tim Russert asked a series of questions on just about every controversy or flip flop in Richardson’s past. None appeared to catch Richardson off guard. Though many of his answers weren’t completely satisfying, under the circumstances, his performance was about as good as could be expected.

The grilling began with Iraq. Richardson said in his book several years ago that America had to stay the course, that it couldn’t abandon the Iraqis. Richardson now wants all American troops out of Iraq by the end of this year.

Asked about it, Richardson said he at first supported the war and, even after it became clear that the war was initiated under false pretenses and was being mismanaged, he believed the United States would have to stick it out. As the war has evolved, he said, American troops have become hated by more than half the population and are part of the problem, not the solution.

Richardson was asked about his most recent controversy – the claim by the mother of a soldier who was killed in Iraq that he is lying when he says she thanked him for her son’s death benefit check – and he refused to apologize.

Still, she has demanded that he stop using her son’s story, and Richardson said he would do that.

“We have different recollections,” he said. “… I respect that woman. I will not mention that again. I’m sorry for the way she feels, but I believe I acted honorably.”

Richardson effectively turned attention to the fact that he proposed a death benefit in New Mexico for the families of National Guard soldiers who are killed – a proposal that has since been copied in 30 states.

He effectively turned the focus a number of times to his experience and record, but Russert was also effective in bringing Richardson back to the question at hand, which prolonged the beating.

Richardson’s weakest moment

Richardson’s weakest moment came as he discussed the current immigration proposal in the Senate. When the plan was first announced, he said he supported it. Three days later, he changed his mind.

He tried to explain that by saying he saw a document laying out the framework for the plan the day before he officially announced his presidential run last week, then saw the actual bill, which included more details, the day after he announced. He said he supports the general framework, but not some of the specifics in the bill.

But he didn’t seem to know about some of the specifics in the bill. At one point he admitted he didn’t know the details of a provision in the bill that he brought up, and explained that by saying the bill is long and he’s been busy campaigning in a different state every day.

He attempted to disarm the moment, as he frequently does, with the silly grin that some say adds to his “frat boy” image. It made him look childish.

I counted three of those “frat boy” moments during the show, which is a huge improvement for Richardson. After a light week of campaigning, Richardson appeared rested, spoke softly but confidently and didn’t appear overly caffeinated or sweaty like he did during the first candidate debate in April.

When asked about New Mexico being last in so many categories, including poverty, dropout and crime rates, Richardson said the state is improving. He pulled a few examples out of his hat that made the point, then emphasized it by reminding Russert that 69 percent of voter re-elected him.

“We are a poor state, Tim, but the fact is, we have been moving forward,” he said.

Admitting mistakes

Richardson admitted that scandal during his tenure at the Department of Energy cost him a shot at being Al Gore’s running mate in 2000, and admitted that he made a mistake during his tenure in saying reforms he put in place made the nation’s laboratories entirely secure.

He also spoke with confidence about those reforms and how he believes he made a difference.

He defended owning stock in an energy company that benefits from higher gas prices – and on whose board he sat for a time after being energy secretary – by saying he “had to earn a living.” Coming from a man who has never known poverty, or even a middle-class living, it was a less-than-satisfying explanation on which Russert hammered him.

Richardson later recovered by saying he has sold his interest in the company and pointing out that he has made a lot less off corporations than the other, richer presidential candidates, which is a valid point.

Richardson explained his decision to vote to repeal an assault weapons ban in Congress that he had earlier voted for by saying the ban was part of a larger package he supported but the ban was something he didn’t support. He admitted once again that he hesitated to call for the resignation of the U.S. attorney general simply because he is Hispanic.

Then he hit a home run.

“I am not a model of perfection,” Richardson said. “I believe I have strong principles. I believe I am somebody who is going to tell the truth.”

That’s how Richardson has played the game his entire career, and it’s why regular people like him. All politicians have their flip flops. Richardson has generally managed to portray himself as human, as an average guy who’s taking on a bunch of rich career politicians.

He even managed to sound credible and funny when arguing that he can be a fan of both the Boston Red Sox and the New York Yankees. He used that argument to cap off the show and highlight the experience he wants everyone to remember.

“This is the thing about me Tim,” he said. “I can bring people together.”

That one got even Russert to chuckle.

You can watch the entire show by clicking here. You can read the transcript here.

Guv can redeem debate performance this week

Posted 5/29/2007 10:30:00 AM

Gov. Bill Richardson has a busy schedule this week that includes an opportunity to redeem himself after a poor performance in the first democratic presidential candidate debate several weeks ago.

Richardson will spend much of today in Boca Raton, Fla., attending fundraisers, according to a news release from his campaign. On Wednesday, he’ll make stops in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands to attend fundraisers.

He’ll spend Thursday in New Mexico and will attend a fundraiser in Santa Fe in the evening. On Friday, he’ll attend fundraisers in Gallup and Albuquerque.

Richardson will be in New Hampshire and Iowa on Saturday – in The Granite State in the morning to attend the state’s Democratic Party convention and in the Hawkeye State in the evening to attend a dinner event.

On Sunday, he’ll take part in the second debate of democratic presidential candidates. The event begins at 5 p.m. Mountain Standard Time and will be broadcast on CNN.

Richardson needs to take LFC audit seriously

Posted 5/29/2007 08:07:00 AM