Tension between the Senate and governor is already spewing into the public view even before the 60-day legislative session kicks off on Tuesday.
Yesterday, Sen. Linda Lopez, D-Albuquerque and chair of the Senate Rules Committee, requested that Gov. Bill Richardson reconsider his refusal to allow the Department of Public Safety to conduct background checks for the committee on Richardson’s high-level appointees that are subject to confirmation.
“The committee has an obligation to act responsibly. … If state, school and local government employers perform background checks on corrections personnel, school custodians and accountants, there is all the more reason to do the same thing for these high-level positions,” Lopez said in a news release. “I am hopeful the governor will agree it is time to have a more meaningful confirmation process.”
Lopez said if the committee “is unable to obtain good background information, it will have difficulty in moving forward with any confirmations.”
The new pressure from Lopez comes as Richardson is under heavy scrutiny because of a federal grand jury investigation into allegations of pay-to-play in his administration. Media attention on the probe has helped give new energy to a move for ethics reform in Santa Fe.
Richardson’s office did not respond to requests for comment from The Santa Fe New Mexican. A Richardson spokesman has not immediately responded to my request for comment. Last year, a spokesman told the newspaper that the administration conducts checks on appointees and the Rules Committee “is free to do its own evaluations.”
That came after the committee started using the public safety department to conduct such background checks last year, a process Richardson quickly brought to a halt.
In her news release, Lopez said the attempt to secure background checks “reflects the deepening sensitivity to ethics and good governmental conduct in the state.” She said, before the committee started using such background checks last year, the governor only provided the committee with the names of his nominees and “brief background information, but not a lot more.”
“Without background checks, most of the committee’s information came from persons supporting — or sometimes opposing — the appointment,” Lopez said, adding that “it was hit-or-miss” — and in some instances the committee “missed important information for extremely sensitive appointments involving fiscal, policy and personnel responsibilities.”