Susana Martinez (left, courtesy photo) and Diane Denish (photo by Heath Haussamen)
Republican gubernatorial candidate Susana Martinez opposes public financing of elections, while Democratic opponent Diane Denish wants to give campaign contribution limits a try before she considers expanding public financing.
The current public financing system in New Mexico is voluntary and applies only to races for seats on the Public Regulation Commission, Supreme Court and Court of Appeals.
Instead of public financing, Martinez wants to increase transparency and accountability by “moving toward real-time reporting” and the conducting of random audits of campaign reports to ensure candidates are following the law.
Ending the existing public financing system is not something the governor can do on her own. The Legislature would have to approve such a proposal.
In addition to wanting to try out campaign contribution limits – which take effect after the current election cycle – Denish also wants changes to the existing public financing system. She said she wants “stricter audit requirements” and “a mechanism requiring candidates who are seeking public financing in these select offices to demonstrate a high level of grassroots support.”
The candidates’ positions on public financing came in response to questions I asked about the subject. The questions:
- Do you support expanding the state’s public financing system for elections, keeping the system in place only for races in which it already applies (Public Regulation Commission and some judicial races), or scaling back or eliminating the public financing system completely, and why?
- If you would seek to expand it, to what races should it be applied?
- Are there any other changes to the public financing system you would seek to enact?
The responses:
Susana Martinez
“I do not support spending more tax dollars to fund political campaigns. Public financing of campaigns forces those who may not necessarily agree with the political viewpoint of a candidate to finance their campaigns. With all the troubling budget problems we are facing, we shouldn’t spend taxpayer dollars on anything other than critical priorities like creating jobs and getting our state back on track.
“I support ensuring there is more transparency concerning the reporting of political contributions and moving toward real-time reporting. Furthermore, we should also be conducting random audits of campaign reports that are filed to ensure that contributions are being spent within the requirements of the law.”
Diane Denish
“I support strict contribution limits and full transparency, which is why I was an outspoken supporter for the state’s new campaign finance law and why I voluntarily reported my campaign contributions more than the law requires. Before we ask taxpayers to cover the costs of all state elections, I think we need to give the new law – which doesn’t even go into effect until after this election – a chance to succeed.
“One thing is clear: multi-millionaires from Texas – or any other state – shouldn’t be allowed to come in and buy an election in New Mexico. And that’s why I feel the new law that limits contribution amounts is a smart step forward for New Mexico.”
Since Denish’s initial statement didn’t answer the question about whether the existing public financing system should be kept in place, I asked for clarification. Her response:
“I would like to see the current system changed to have stricter audit requirements. I would also push for a mechanism requiring candidates who are seeking public financing in these select offices to demonstrate a high level of grassroots support.”