Attorney General Gary King (Photo by Heath Haussamen)
Attorney General Gary King is defending his acceptance of a campaign contribution of $15,000 some 11 months after a law capping donations at $5,000 took effect.
Even though his campaign is active, King says he’s not currently a candidate for office so he can accept more than $5,000 to pay down debt. But others say he still shouldn’t have taken the contribution.
From The Santa Fe New Mexican:
“‘The easy legal solution is that it applies to candidates in elections 2012 and after,’ King said in a telephone interview Wednesday afternoon. ‘And I am not a candidate. I went back and read the act this afternoon.’”
“King, a Democrat, added that his GOP opponent in last year’s attorney general race also could accept contributions of $5,000 or more.
“That isn’t Republican Matt Chandler’s reading of the law.
“‘The law is very clear that any funds that were raised after Nov. 3 could not exceed $5,000 per election cycle,’ said Chandler, the district attorney in Clovis, who tried to unseat King last year.
“Steven Robert Allen, executive director of New Mexico Common Cause, a good-government organization, allied with King during a multiyear effort to enact limits on what contributors could give to political campaigns in New Mexico. The New Mexico Legislature passed the law in 2009 after years of New Mexico being one of a handful of U.S. states that didn’t restrict money going into political campaigns.
“‘When we worked on this law, the Attorney General’s Office worked on this with Common Cause,’ Allen said. ‘We wanted this to cover both candidates before an election and public officials after an election. Common Cause’s intention was to put the limit on the amount of money that could be given by a private interest to an official decision-maker. That is why we have this law. If that isn’t the purpose of the law, then what’s the point?’”
I’ve also criticized King, saying the donation might be illegal and, regardless, there’s an appearance issue King should have considered. From my commentary on the subject:
“New Mexico was supposed to be done with an era in which voters had to consider whether large contributions were affecting the decisions of their elected officials. King’s office even stated, in the fiscal impact report for the bill that eventually became the new contribution limit law, that ‘placing limits on political contributions is the most effective vehicle for addressing the current ‘pay to play’ scandals.’
“Legalities aside, of all the statewide elected officials to not think about the appearance this donation would create, our top crime fighter, the man charged with rooting out corruption, the official who should be the most conscientious about leading by example on ethical issues, is doing the opposite.
“After applying the $15,000 donation, King still has $248,000 in unpaid campaign debt, and it’s all money he loaned his own campaign. Following King’s logic, someone could write a check for almost a quarter of a million dollars, and it would be OK because it’s past debt from a different era when the size of donations wasn’t limited. And the money would pass through King’s campaign before going directly to him.
“Would such a donor expect something in return, such as the AG’s office backing off a civil lawsuit or not indicting a corrupt public official?”
The secretary of state is investigating.