Heath Haussamen
Public information belongs to the public, and it shouldn’t be sold for profit by the government. But that’s exactly what the state is doing with its electronic database of driver’s records.
That information is sold exclusively to a Kansas company, which has a monopoly on selling the information to everyone else. Former Gov. Bill Richardson’s administration thought this was a good idea, and it entered into a contract that turns public records into a profit-making venture.
A bill that would have undone that outrageous deal was tabled Monday by the House Appropriations and Finance Committee because – surprise, surprise – the state is now dependent on the $6 million the records generate every year, and the Motor Vehicle Division doesn’t know how to live without that cash.
Though House Bill 406, sponsored by Rep. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, had previously passed two committees unanimously, it appears to be dead this session. The appropriation committee’s vote to table was 9-5, with four members absent.
While her taxation and revenue secretary opposed the bill during Monday’s hearing, Gov. Susana Martinez wasn’t quite as clear on her position in a statement from spokesman Scott Darnell to NMPolitics.net.
“The governor is supportive of the intention in HB 406; however, she is also very concerned by what appears to be a significant fiscal impact to the state budget – which would need to be resolved in the overall construct of the state budget,” Darnell said.
Boo.
‘The public owns these records’
The bill had broad, bipartisan support because it’s needed. Public records belong to the public – not to a state agency or a private company seeking to make a buck off them.
It’s ridiculous that one state agency has a private company padding the cost of providing the records to the public with profits for the company and the state agency.
“I am disappointed that an idea with broad bipartisan support is being held hostage to one agency’s profit-making scheme,” said N.M. Foundation for Open Government Executive Director Sarah Welsh.
The bill would have repealed what the foundation called “broad and unconstitutional” restrictions on all state databases, making information in those databases fully available to the public – at the actual cost of providing the records, not at a cost a private company deems appropriate so it and the state can make a profit.
Welsh said the amount of money generated for the state is irrelevant, because it’s not OK for the government to sell the public’s records for profit.
“I don’t doubt that the government can make a lot of money by selling its records,” Welsh said. “But the public owns those records, and it shouldn’t have to pay for them twice.”
I couldn’t have said it better.