{"id":32728,"date":"2011-10-12T08:20:55","date_gmt":"2011-10-12T14:20:55","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/?p=32728"},"modified":"2011-10-13T07:41:09","modified_gmt":"2011-10-13T13:41:09","slug":"ag-thumbs-his-nose-at-contribution-limits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2011\/10\/ag-thumbs-his-nose-at-contribution-limits\/","title":{"rendered":"AG thumbs his nose at contribution limits"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"<\/a>

Heath Haussamen<\/p><\/div>\n

Attorney General Gary King\u2019s<\/a> latest outrageous action is accepting a campaign contribution of $15,000 less than a year after a law limiting donations to $5,000 \u2013 a law he supported \u2013 took effect.<\/p>\n

Yes, you can slap your forehead now. The AG supported contribution limits with his words, but with his newest action, he\u2019s attempting to circumvent the new law.<\/p>\n

The cap of $5,000 per election (one each for a primary and general election) took effect Nov. 3, 2010. But King\u2019s newest finance report<\/a>, filed Tuesday, reveals that he accepted a $15,000 contribution from the New York law firm Bernstein Litowitz Berger and Grossmann on Sept. 22 of this year.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s how King spokesman Phil Sisneros justified the donation:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe contribution was for retirement of debt from the attorney general\u2019s 2010 re-election campaign and subject to 2010 reporting requirements. As such, we are confident the contribution does not fall within the limits of the new law. And just so you know, the NY firm does not have any contracts with the AGO.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

No contracts with the AG. I feel so much better.<\/p>\n

Not.<\/p>\n

Watchdog says King broke the law<\/h3>\n

You see, the contribution limit law<\/a> doesn\u2019t state that it took effect upon completion of the 2010 election cycle, and it doesn\u2019t state that it doesn\u2019t apply to retiring campaign debt incurred before it took effect.<\/p>\n

It states that it took effect on Nov. 3, 2010. Period. No ifs, ands or buts about it.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m not a lawyer, and maybe there\u2019s some provision or court case elsewhere that King will use to justify accepting the contribution. But Steven Robert Allen, executive director of Common Cause New Mexico, came to the same conclusion I did. The Santa Fe New Mexican quoted him<\/a> as saying there was no doubt the contribution violated the law.<\/p>\n

\u201cA contributor can\u2019t give more than $5,000 to a statewide officeholder since this law went into effect. That means a statewide candidate since Nov. 3 of the last year can\u2019t accept contributions in excess of $5,000, regardless of whether that\u2019s to pay off a campaign debt,\u201d Allen said.<\/p>\n

The Secretary of State\u2019s Office says it\u2019s investigating. Fantastic. Dianna Duran<\/a> will investigate whether her own lawyer broke the law.<\/p>\n

This is almost as offensive as the time the guy who is charged with enforcing the state\u2019s sunshine laws violated the Inspection of Public Records Act<\/a> by refusing to release public records to someone who requested them.<\/p>\n

Oh wait\u2026 That was also Gary King.<\/p>\n

NM was supposed to be done with this era<\/h3>\n

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\u2019s office even stated, in the fiscal impact report<\/a> for the bill that eventually became the new contribution limit law, that \u201cplacing limits on political contributions is the most effective vehicle for addressing the current \u2018pay to play\u2019 scandals.\u201d<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

After applying the $15,000 donation, King still has $248,000 in unpaid campaign debt, and it\u2019s all money he loaned his own campaign. Following King\u2019s logic, someone could write a check for almost a quarter of a million dollars, and it would be OK because it\u2019s past debt from a different era when the size of donations wasn\u2019t limited. And the money would pass through King\u2019s campaign before going directly to him.<\/p>\n

Would such a donor expect something in return, such as the AG\u2019s office backing off a civil lawsuit or not indicting a corrupt public official?<\/p>\n

Is it just me, or does anyone else find it offensive that our attorney general says the Inspection of Public Records Act doesn\u2019t apply when it comes to a specific situation involving his office, and that the contribution-limit law doesn\u2019t apply when it comes to a specific situation involving his campaign?<\/p>\n

And because he\u2019s the AG \u2013 the guy who interprets the law for other state agencies \u2013 we\u2019re supposed to trust him on that, even when it defies logic?<\/p>\n

I don\u2019t think so. This is appalling.<\/p>\n

Haussamen bio<\/a>\u00a0\u2502\u00a0Commentary page<\/a>\u00a0\u2502\u00a0Feed<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Attorney General Gary King\u2019s latest outrageous action is accepting a campaign contribution of $15,000 less than a year after a law limiting donations to $5,000 \u2013 a law he supported \u2013 took effect.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1192,10],"tags":[223,224,111,107],"class_list":["post-32728","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary","category-haussamen-columns","tag-campaign-finance","tag-gary-king","tag-open-government","tag-roundhouse"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32728","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32728"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/32728\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32728"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=32728"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=32728"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}