It looks like the push to approve a series of ethics reform bills will come down to the wire.
On Monday, the Senate approved Senate Bill 931, sponsored by John Grubesic, D-Santa Fe, which would place limits on gifts to elected officials and candidates. On Tuesday, it approved Senate Bill 800, sponsored by Sen. Dede Feldman, D-Albuquerque, which places lifts on campaign contributions to candidates for offices and political action committees.
But the two bills haven’t yet made their way on to the calendar in the House, and the Senate hasn’t approved any other bills – House or Senate versions – in the ethics reform package.
However, three House ethics bills are on the Senate calendar today, along with 112 other bills. Senate Majority Leader Michael Sanchez, D-Belen, has hinted that the Senate may not adjourn until the early hours of Thursday as it works through the lengthy agenda.
“We’ve seen momentum in the last two days,” said Matt Brix, executive director of Common Cause New Mexico. “We’re hoping we can keep the momentum strong and hopefully pass a couple more ethics bills.”
It’s not clear when the House bills will be heard in the Senate. Here’s where the four with the best chance of passing stand:
• House Bill 821, sponsored by Rep. Mimi Stewart, D-Albuquerque, is similar to Feldman’s bill and is No. 83 on today’s Senate calendar. There’s one major difference between the House and Senate versions: The House version applies only to contributions to candidates, while the Senate version applies to contributions to candidates and PACs. This is sure to be a contentious difference.
• House Bill 819, sponsored by Rep. Gail Chasey, D-Albuquerque, is similar to Grubesic’s bill and is No. 85 on today’s Senate calendar.
• House Bill 818, sponsored by Speaker of the House Ben Lujan, D-Nambé, would create a public financing system for statewide and judicial candidates similar to the system already in place for Public Regulation Commission races. It’s bogged down along with hundreds of other bills in the Senate Finance Committee.
• House Bill 823, sponsored by Rep. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, would make several amendments to the Governmental Conduct Act. It would require that public officials disclose, in cases of contracts and other business with the state, not only their own business but also that of spouses, children, parents and siblings. It also makes the act apply to judges, who are currently exempt from its provision that prohibits bribery.
Cervantes’ bill has been on the Senate’s daily calendar for several days. It climbed as high as No. 32 on Tuesday, but has fallen to No. 62 on today’s calendar.
The Senate skips around, so that doesn’t necessarily mean much.
But I’m baffled that this bill hasn’t yet been approved, as it’s probably the least controversial of all bills in the ethics reform package. There have been two recent examples of why judges shouldn’t be exempt from the act. A bribery charge against a former judge in
The bill was approved unanimously by the House and Senate last year, but minor differences between the versions of the bill weren’t resolved by the Legislature before time expired on the 2006 session.
As for the House, there’s no word yet on when the two Senate bills will appear on its calendar. Grubesic’s is awaiting a hearing in the first of two committees it must pass before heading to the House floor. Feldman’s hasn’t yet been assigned to any House committees.
The session ends at noon on Saturday.