Proponents of ethics reform have reason to hope the Legislature might approve a couple of proposals during the current session, but those who are hoping for significant, widespread change are likely to be disappointed when the House and Senate adjourn on Feb. 14.
Four days into the 2008 session, most of the governor’s announced priorities already have sponsors who have introduced legislation. Not ethics reform. Even though legislative leaders have said they will allow deliberation on four ethics-reform issues – campaign contribution limits, an ethics commission, additional funding for the Secretary of State’s online reporting system and funding for a study on creation of an election commission – the proposals are getting a late start in a 30-day session that will be largely consumed by funding bills and health-care reform.
It’s no secret that many lawmakers are resistant to ethics reform. There’s an additional factor at play this year.
“The leadership doesn’t want any ethics bills to fail in a highly public way and in an election year,” one lawmaker told me.
The majority of lawmakers agreed last year to place limits on contributions to individuals, but they couldn’t agree on whether to also place limits on contributions to political action committees and political parties, so the proposal died.
The same debate will bog down the proposal this year. It will take determination to get that bill approved.
The ethics commission proposal promises to be even more contentious. Though Gov. Bill Richardson’s ethics task force has worked to address the concerns of senators who don’t want the governor extending his reach any further into their territory, the proposal will be viewed in that chamber with skepticism by some and disdain by many.
The House approved the commission last year but didn’t fund it.
There is, on the other hand, widespread support for increasing funding for the Secretary of State’s campaign finance reporting and disclosure system. This is one proposal that should pass and allow the creation of an online database that is easily accessible, user-friendly and searchable.
The other proposals will have a much more difficult time. Some lawmakers I spoke with think the Legislature may approve limits on contributions to individuals, but they are less certain about the chances for placing limits on contributions to PACs and political parties. I’ve spoken to none who are optimistic about approval of an ethics commission.
Proposals that aren’t gaining traction
A proposal to expand the state’s system for public financing of campaigns isn’t gaining any traction. Though the governor’s task force endorsed an expansion of the system, legislative leaders don’t plan to consider the issue this year.
And
The proposal to open legislative conference committees to the public – which twice died by one vote in the Senate in 2007 – is another that legislative leaders won’t allow deliberation on this year. It’s one whose death always gains a lot of attention from the media.
Many lawmakers would like to avoid that attention in an election year.
Election-year pressure
There are a number of incumbents in both parties with serious challengers this election year, including two in
Perhaps that’s why the state Constitution puts 30-day sessions in election years and 60-day sessions in off years. Most policy changes are deliberated in the longer sessions.
Still, it remains true that the vast majority of New Mexicans want significant ethics reform. Several polls have confirmed this. There’s always a chance that voters will lash out at lawmakers in June and November for avoiding ethics reform during the session.
There are efforts to place further pressure on lawmakers. Steven Allen, the director of New Mexico Common Cause, will appear Sunday at 10 a.m. on Eye on New Mexico, a television program that airs on KOB-TV in
The first step is going to be getting lawmakers to introduce the ethics-reform bills.