voting matters

Common Cause Luncheon Saturday

2011-10-27T07:06:00.000-07:00

Our friends at Common Cause are hosting their annual luncheon this weekend- Saturday, October 29 from 12:00-2:00 PM at the Continuing Ed building at UNM. They will be presenting the Jack Taylor Award to state senator Peter Wirth for his ongoing leadership on clean election laws. There will also be a panel discussion on the future of campaign financing laws.

To sign up, visit their website at www.commoncause.org/nm or call 505-323-6399. Cost is $20 and includes lunch. Please support Common Cause's valuable work in New Mexico.

More Money in Politics

2011-10-22T11:22:00.000-07:00

Last week, local newspapers published financial reports of state and federal candidates. Unfortunately, for the mass media, raising money is becoming synonymous with winning. Our elections are becoming less about debating the critical issues facing our state and nation, and more about marketing and negative campaigning.

At the same time, Public Regulation Commission candidate Danny Maki declared that he would not be using public campaign financing. His donation report shows exactly why we need public financing in this important post. Maki avoided directly breaking the campaign code restrictions on who can donate to PRC candidates (see the below post for more on this trend), but he is clearly an industry insider, or trying to become one.

It is way beyond time to break this cycle. On top of what is happening with candidates, we can also expect to see over the top spending by independent groups due to the Supreme Court's ridiculous ruling in Citizens United. Election 2012 will certainly be the most expensive in US history, but people power can overcome corporate power. It's up to us to make sure it does.

Money in Politics

2011-10-13T07:33:00.000-07:00

Today's Santa Fe New Mexican highlights this state's ongoing problem with money in politics. Two headline stories focus on what should be illegal donations to our state's leaders.

One points out that Governor Martinez accepted over $400,000 to her various campaign funds during the legislative period just ended. The period is even called a prohibited period in state campaign law, but Governor Martinez points out it is only illegal to solicit donations, not to accept them.

Across the street, Attorney General Gary King has accepted a $15,000 donation to help repay his 2010 campaign debt, in spite of a newly passed law limiting individual contributions to $5,000 each. It's ok, says the man charged with enforcing New Mexico's laws, because it is for a past campaign not a current one.

All this comes as a group of Republicans is trying to overturn the law in our state Supreme Court, claiming it interferes with their First Amendment right to free spending.

Money is not speech. Corporations are not people. Government is not for sale.

It is time to take our Democracy back. Occupy Santa Fe!

VOTE! TWICE!!

2011-10-03T09:42:00.000-07:00

Residents of Albuquerque are encouraged to get out and vote in tomorrow's municipal election. Candidates for city council and 12 ballot questions are to be decided.

And everyone is encouraged to go to www.sfreporter.com and vote in their opinion poll, which asks about the recent special legislative session, called to redistrict the state's Congressional, PRC, and legislative districts. There is even an option for an independent redistricting commission!

State and County Redistricting

2011-09-25T07:25:00.000-07:00

The legislators have left Santa Fe. After 20 days at $50,000 each (a cool $1,000,000), all they seem to have accomplished is passing partisan plans for redistricting that are sure to be vetoed. They could not even agree on a plan for the US House of Representatives. The Republicans called the Democratic plan partisan, the Democrats called the Republican plan partisan, and in this case I think they are both correct.

As the state plans head to the governor and then almost certainly into the courts, Santa Fe County is holding two public hearings on its plan for the Board of County Commissioners. Tuesday, September 27, the redistricting plans will be discussed at the regular board meeting. Another meeting is planned October 11.

More info and maps of the 5 plans are available for viewing at the county website, www.santafecounty.org. Hopefully, the commission can act in a more responsible manner than the state or city did.

Redistricting Nightmare

2011-09-20T07:41:00.000-07:00

New Mexico's Congressional and Public Regulation Commission districts have been redrawn, and the plans have been approved by the legislature along party lines.

As predicted, there is the threat of a veto by the governor, which would mean the situation will end up in the courts, with NM judges making the final decision on district boundaries.

NM Democratic lawmakers are once again putting partisan politics ahead of fair play and real democracy. We have been advocating for a long time for the creation of a citizens' commission to redraw these lines based on objective standards. This year's $1,000,000 special session is nothing more than partisan posturing and power grabbing that has no place in our democracy.

We need to avoid this fiasco in 2020, and to that end we will be working to pass a law requiring independent commissions beginning then. It's a shame the legislature did not heed this advice in time to save the state millions of dollars this year.

Public Campaign Financing in Albuquerque

2011-09-14T09:15:00.000-07:00

Albuquerque's municipal election is October 4, 2011. Voters will elect councilors in 4 of the 9 districts, and vote on a dozen bond issues and one proposition. Early voting starts today. see www.cabq.gov/clerk for details on voting sites and ballot questions.

Of note is the fact that 4 of the 6 candidates have chosen to participate in the city's public campaign financing system, in spite of the recent decision by the US Supreme Court that ruled the matching funds provision unconstitutional.

Only Greg Payne and Trudy Jones in Council District 8 have opted out of the system. Predictably, that race has also generated some seriously negative campaigning, as reported yesterday at New Mexico Politics with Joe Monahan (www.joemonahan.com).

If you live in district 8, ask the candidates why they aren't running clean- and get out and vote, Albuquerque!

Special Legislative Session on Redistricting

2011-09-04T09:50:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, September 6, legislators will be reconvening in Santa Fe to set district boundaries for the next ten years. Despite repeated attempts by citizen activists to create an independent commission to redraw district boundaries, once again legislators will be responsible for creating the new districts.

Will we see most districts gerrymandered as a form of incumbent protection plan? Or ornery representatives abusing their powers in attempts to punish independent minded legislators, as recently happened in Santa Fe's redistricting process? Probably both. Will we see a repeat of the last redistricting process that ended up in costly court cases. Probably so, seeing as we once again have a Democratic legislator and Republican governor.

Two Santa Fe area legislators at least took the time last week to hold public hearings for constituents, but don't expect much more transparency from our elected officials. There are currently 8 different plans for the house and senate, 7 for the Congress and 5 for the PRC. They are viewable at www.legis.state.nm.us.

We will blog about the plans as they become more finalized, and begin again in January to lobby for an independent commission to do this critical work after the 2020 census, and beyond.

Ranked Choice Voting in Santa Fe

2011-09-02T08:58:00.000-07:00

At the Santa Fe City Council meeting last Tuesday (August 30), four people testified in favor of implementation of Ranked Choice Voting. Nonetheless, it seems we are no closer to using it in 2012.

Unbelievably, the administration and even some councilors seem to think that it is too much work to follow the law. One councilor even wrote in an email that it doesn't matter whether we are capable of implementation, because "I could not support adding a 3rd new requirement for the next election."

Amazing, it is as if the city gets to pick and choose which of its laws to enforce, based on convenience and circumstance?

I hope you'll take a moment to contact the mayor and your councilors and tell them you want to see Ranked Choice Voting in March 2012.

More On Santa Fe Ranked Choice Voting

2011-08-28T15:51:00.000-07:00

We are now trying two more tactics in the attempt to implement Ranked Choice Voting in Santa Fe. First, we are mounting a public pressure campaign to get the attention of our councilors. Please send a letter to the editor and contact your city representatives about the issue.

There is a Santa Fe city council meeting Tuesday, (yes, Tuesday instead of Wednesday), August 30. I am urging everyone to either appear at 7:00 to make public comment, or contact your councilors and the mayor today or tomorrow and urge them to commit to implementing Ranked Choice Voting in March 2012.

The message is simple: software and equipment to implement Ranked Choice is available at a reasonable cost, therefore, it is illegal NOT to have Ranked Choice Voting in the next municipal election.

Second, we are looking at the cost and feasibility of a lawsuit forcing the city to implement Ranked Choice Voting in the 2012 election. A lawyer is currently reviewing relevant law. If you care to make a donation to help cover the cost, please send a check to Voting Matters, POB 4764, SF NM 87502, with "legal fund" in the memo line.

Ranked Choice Voting

2011-08-22T10:39:00.000-07:00

Followers of this blog are aware that the city of Santa Fe amended its charter in 2008 to require the use of Ranked Choice Voting in municipal elections. Nonetheless, the city council and administrators have not done their jobs to make sure that the will of the people is followed. So, it is looking like the city will once again use a plurality takes all system in 2012.

I think it is time for one last ditch effort to have Ranked Choice Voting in March, and I have sent the following letter to the mayor, councilors, city attorney and city clerk. If you agree that the city should follow its own laws, I hope you will take a moment to call or write your councilors and the mayor. Contact information for them is found at www.santafenm.gov

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Dear councilor,

Call me crazy, but I am writing to you one final time before election 2012 begins, in the earnest hope that you will create an ordinance to pave the way for implementation of Ranked Choice Voting.

As you know, the city charter calls for implementation “in 2010, or as soon thereafter as equipment and software for tabulation of votes and the ability to correct incorrectly marked, in-person ballots, is available at a reasonable price”.

We have demonstrated three ways that implementation can be achieved in the case a runoff is required. (1) by hand tallying the results; (2) by hand sorting the ballots based on first place choices and refeeding the ballots into existing machines; or (3) by buying or leasing a single machine capable of conducting the runoff.

Again, we need a simple ordinance that would allow us to use a machine other than those provided by the county, and extend the canvassing period to allow for time to conduct the runoff. The memo you recently received from the Secretary of State’s office merely reiterates that state law requires municipalities to use county machines, but it does NOT address the issue of whether the city can amend its election code for this purpose. As a home rule charter city, Santa Fe has created its own election code, and can amend it to allow use of a different voting machine.

It seems to me that the onus is on the city to show that the equipment and software is NOT available at a reasonable cost, since it has been demonstrated that the runoff can be done with existing equipment, and since the charter requires Ranked Choice Voting when that condition is met.

End Legalized Bribery- a book review

2011-08-17T13:30:00.000-07:00

I just picked up this book at the 25 cent book exchange in La Tienda at Eldorado- a great place for books of all types. "End Legalized Bribery" was written by former Congressman Cecil Heftel, and published in 1998. It was published at the same time that Arizona and Maine were adopting Public Campaign Financing systems, on which New Mexico's laws are based.

While it is noticibly dated in some respects, it is a treasury of good information proving the need for meaningful campaign financing of public elections.

Heftel's book begins with a photo of Bill Clinton and Newt Gingrich pledging to take on lobbying and political reform in 1995 with the caption "They Lied". The opening chapters outline the problem, making the comparison that if donations like those during Congressional campaigns were given to judges or executive branch policy makers, contributors would be convicted of bribery.

Heftel then goes on to lay out the basics of meaningful campaign financing, including five principles: (1) limit spending and duration of campaigns; (2) eliminate money as determinant of candidates' viability; (3) create a level playing field; (4) break the hold of monied interests on our government; and (5) be comprehensive, free of loopholds, easy to understand, and easy to enforce.

The central chapters of the book give specific examples of campaign contributions by certain sectors of the economy, and the resultant laws that are passed by Congress to benefit those groups. There are chapters on health policy, defense, taxes, the deficit, the environment, and industries like the automotive.

Heftel repeatedly points out that the Big Businesses involved do not just give away money, but as with other expenditures, they expect a return on investment with their campaign contributions. And they get it-Heftel points out that Congressmen who vote with their supporters get much more in contributions than those who vote in opposition.

In spite of being written over a decade ago, this book is poignant today. The US Supreme Court recently ruled unconstitutional certain parts of the Arizona (and by extension, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, and New Mexico systems). Advocates for fair elections and good government need to review these tenets and challenge the Supreme decision. One way is to amend the constition to clarify that corporations are not people, as our friends at www.movetoamend.org are doing. Another is to make sure new public campaign financing laws will pass muster under the current interpretation.

Jerome Block and our broken electoral system

2011-08-10T13:47:00.000-07:00

The untold story of the Jerome Block scandal is how he came to be elected in the first place. While the major media focuses on his immaturity and dereliction of duty, you won't see much mention of our broken electoral system.

First, Jerome won his Democratic Party primary with a mere 20% of the vote. That is right, four out of five Democrats voted for someone other than Jerome in June 2008. Whatever happened to majority rules?

Then, it comes to light that Jerome had illegally spent public campaign funds, in two instances--one, by donating public money to another candidate (Hillary Clinton), and two, by giving money to San Miguel County Clerk Paul Maes for a supposed performance by a band at a rally that never took place. A small fine was imposed, but no further repercussions.

Finally, the sraight party ballot option put him over the top in the general election. Its defenders say it is a convenience to voters, but the fact is that 5 out of 13 county clerks (all Democrats) misinformed the press (and presumably voters) about whether a voter could vote straight party in general but change votes in certain races, when asked about it by the SF Reporter.

Voting Matters has been out in front on all three of these issues for years--by advocating for Ranked Choice Voting in party primaries and all elections with more than two candidates, by advocating for Public Campaign Financing and strict enforcement of violations, and by advocating for the elimination of the straight party ticket in general elections.

Our elections are broken, and as a result, our democracy is broken too. Let's hope the powers that be feel the pressure from we the people so that we can create the government and democracy that is our birthright.

public campaign financing in Santa Fe

2011-08-08T09:14:00.000-07:00

Here is a letter I just sent to city councilors on their ordinance to move up filing dates and dates for public campaign financing. Please let your voice be heard before Wednesday's city council meeting.

Dear Councilor,

I just want to drop you a quick line regarding the upcoming vote to change certain dates to accommodate provisions of the public campaign financing ordinance.

As a member of the advisory committee that helped draft the ordinance, I want to encourage you to approve the changes.

One of the main concerns of candidates considering using public financing is that they will be vastly outspent by privately funded candidates, and in this instance, the worry is that campaigns won’t have the needed startup money soon enough to compete with nonparticipating candidates, who have no time limit on when they can begin spending campaign money.

For public campaign financing to work, it needs to provide as level a playing field as possible, and this ordinance will help do that. Please support the ordinance with a yes vote on Wednesday.

PS: This would be an opportune time to amend the ordinance to include an extended canvassing period after the election to accommodate the eventual implementation of Ranked Choice Voting.

Redistricting is under way

2011-08-07T11:08:00.000-07:00

I just sent this letter to the editor of the Journal Santa Fe, in response to their editorial on Santa Fe's redistricting plan.

If you have any stories about redistricting in your town, please send in a comment about it.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Your August 3 editorial on the city of Santa Fe’s redistricting plan is right on target. Instead of choosing a plan that was more mathematically accurate, that is, more fair, our city councilors instead took the opportunity to play petty political games.

Of course, this is nothing new. A similar scene is playing out in Rio Rancho, and no doubt in other cities around the state. Albuquerque chose to put off constitutionally mandated redistricting, apparently in hopes of changing the balance of power at the October election, and unfathomably a judge agreed to allow it.

Be sure that at the state level, it will be even uglier. Ten years ago, after numerous plans approved by the Democratic controlled legislature and numerous vetoes by the Republican governor, the courts were called in to decide the issue. The whole process cost taxpayers millions of dollars.

This is why good government organizations and concerned citizens have long been calling for multipartisan, independent redistricting commissions. Unfortunately, those in power cede nothing, and would rather have this authority so they can use it as an incumbent protection plan, or, worse, to punish members of their own bodies who don’t go along with the rest.

We need to make sure this doesn’t happen again in 2020 by mandating independent redistricting commissions. Anything less is like leaving the madmen in charge of the asylum.

HB 332 and HJR 21- Redistricting

2011-02-09T09:40:00.001-08:00

HB 332---Tomorrow morning in House Voters and Elections, a bill introduced by chair Mary Helen Garcia will be heard. HB 332 would create a redistricting commission with 18 members, all sitting legislators apointed by the leadership of the two chambers. It provides for the legislators to meet during the interrim and create plans which would then be approved during a special legislative session.

This is exactly the approach that we at Voting Matters have been arguing against for a number of years. Essentially, it is an incumbent protection plan that allows individual legislators and the major parties to preserve the stauts quo- the legislators on the commission will even be appointed in proportion to the current partisan makeup of the two houses.

Cal Mary Helen Garcia's office at 986-4341 and ask her why she thinks this system is fair to voters of NM, and who on the commission will represent the interests of over 200,000 voters not affiliated with either major party?

HJR 21--- Representative Tom Anderson has introduced a joint memorial which would permanently establish a bipartisan commission made up of 8 members, 4 Republicans and 4 Democrats. The members would be appointed by legislative leaders but not necessarily be legislators themselves.

While this is an improvement, it still neglects the views of 20% of New Mexico voters.

We are still waiting for a bill that would create a truly independent commission.

Voter Action Act

2011-02-05T07:26:00.000-08:00

Two bills have been introduced that alter the state's public campaign financing system.

SB32, introduced by Sen Dede Feldman, makes a few minor alterations requested by the former Secretary of State. Unfortunately, it includes a provision that extends the period that the Secretary's office has to certify candidates and distribute funds to candidates.

This creates an enormous obstacle for candidates, who by law would be forbidden from spending any money for a ten day period. This is especially onerous for minor party candidates, as the ten day period includes the fourth of July holiday period.

Because of this defect, we have to oppose SB 32.

On the other hand, SB 294, introduced by Sen Eric Griego, does two important things. First, it expands the Voter Action Act to include all executive and legislative offices. And second, it addresses a key element of the legislation that was ruled unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court last year.

Using terribly flawed reasoning, the Supremes determined that the matching fund provision of Arizona's public campaign financing system "chilled" the free spending rights of nonparticipating candidates, because their spending could benefit participating candidates who would receive matching funds.

The new legislation eliminates matching funds based on nonparticipating candidates' spending, and replaces them with matching funds based on the participating candidates ability to raise private funds in small amounts (not more than $100 per contributor).

While we prefer the current system, it is better to alter it than to risk having the whole system thrown out in court. We support SB 294, which unfortunately as been sentenced to three committees, Senate Rules, Judiciary, and Finance.

HM 7- Corporate personhood

2011-02-01T16:50:00.000-08:00

Also introduced by Representative Egolf is a memorial expressing disagreement with the US Supreme Court decision in Citizens United. The memorial, which does not have the force of law, asks Congress to begin the process of a constitutional amendment to clarify that corporations are not persons, and are not entitled to constitutional protections granted to human beings.

We strongly encourage unanimous passage of this memorial, and hope that our Congressional delegation will make this a priority issue.

More informtion about the national move to overturn the doctrine often referred to as corporate personhood can be found at www.movetoamend.org

HB 154- corporate campaign contributions

2011-02-01T16:34:00.000-08:00

Representative Bran Egolf has introduced a bill that would forbid corporations registered in New Mexico from contributing to state, county or local elections. This would include both candidate and issue elections.

The bill has been assigned to House Consumer and Public Affairs and House Voters and Elections Committees. It should get a hearing next week.

We support ending unrestrained corporate influence in our elections, and urge the legislature to pass this bill.

HJR 2: Term limits for legislators

2011-01-27T08:25:00.000-08:00

State representative Kintigh has introduced a joint memorial which would limit legislators to 12 consecutive years in office in either house. Senators would be allowed 3 four year terms, and representatives 6 two year terms.

HJR 2, if passed by both houses, is a constitutional amendment and would go to the voters at the November 2012 election.

We support these limits, and encourage our legislators to pass this resolution and send it on to the voters. Our exectutive branch and county officeholders are currently limited to 2 four year terms. It makes sense to also put limits on how long legislators can be in office.

School Board Elections

2011-01-21T09:31:00.000-08:00

Tuesday, February 1, school board elections will be held around the state. I encourage everyone to inform themselves on the candidates and get out and vote.

In Santa Fe, the election is a combination of two elections. Both the public school board and the community college will be voted on. This is the first time that this has been allowed under state law, and will save a significant amount of money.

Unfortunately, the only polling place for the community college board election will be at the county clerk's office, so if you want to vote on election day, you will have to go to your normal polling place and the clerk's office.

On the bright side, if you vote early (in person absentee), you can cast both ballots in one location. Early voting hours are Monday through Friday, 8:00 AM-5:00 PM. Early Voting ends Friday, January 28.

Information about polling places and a list of candiates can be found at the clerk's website, www.santafecounty.org/clerk.

Legislature starts today

2011-01-18T08:21:00.000-08:00

This year's legislative session will be much different than those of the past eight years. We will have much more presence by the Republicans, who picked up eight seats in the state House, making the Democratic majority only 37-33. In addition, there will be a Republican Lieutenant Governor presiding over the Senate, and Republicans in the Governor and Secretary of State offices.

Over the next couple of weeks, we will be publishing information about specific election related bills as they become introduced. We encourage all of you to contact key legislators (including your own) as these bills move forward. One key committee, House Voters and Elections, will have at least two new members this year.

As usual, for the most up to date info on bill locations, see www.legis.state.nm.us.

I met with the new Secretary of State, Dianna Duran, last week. As a former county clerk and state legislator, she has a very good understanding of election law. I am very encouraged that she took the time to discuss our issues, and am optimistic that she will be open to supporting an independent redistricting commission, clarifying political party requirements, and eliminating the straight party ballot option.

Enjoy the pomp and ceremony of opening week. The real work starts soon!

More Press on Ranked Choice

2011-01-09T10:19:00.000-08:00

The following "My View" appeared in the Santa fe New Mexican on Saturday, January 8.

Ranked Choice Voting In Peril
by Rick Lass

In March, 2008, Santa Fe voters approved seven amendments to our city charter, including provisions for public campaign financing and ranked choice voting. At the time, I was quoted in this newspaper as saying that winning the election was the easy part, and getting the city to make the change would be the sticking point.

Fortunately, the city council acted to codify a specific system for public campaign financing, and details will be fleshed out in time for the 2012 elections. Ranked choice voting, however, has not received the attention needed to ensure that it also will be implemented in 2012.

City administrators have apparently decided that ranked choice voting would be too much work, and point to an escape clause in the charter language that requires "equipment and software for tabulation of votes...is available at a reasonable price." But, over a year ago, in October 2009, there was a demonstration conducted showing how ballots could be tallied using existing equipment and software. Nevertheless, the city council opted to delay implementation of ranked choice voting.

Unfortunately, the fact that Santa Fe residents voted overwhelmingly to adopt ranked choice voting does not necessarily mean that the city government will take the steps to make it happen. If we want ranked choice voting in place for the March 2012 elections, we need to continue to campaign for it.

Three California cities, Oakland, Berkeley, and San Leandro all conducted their first ranked ballot elections last month, with positive results. Specifically, Oakland would have elected a mayor who had the support of only 34% of voters, but after the runoff was conducted, instead elected a woman who received over 50% of the vote. Santa Fe deserves to have elected officials who have majority support.

I urge everyone interested in fair elections and responsive government to call upon the mayor and your councilors and tell them that it is their responsibility to make sure Santa Fe uses ranked choice voting in 2012. Further delays are unacceptable.

Ranked Choice Voting in Santa Fe

2011-01-06T15:10:00.000-08:00

The following artice appeared in this week's Santa Fe Reporter, and is a good summary of the status of Ranked Choice Voting in Santa Fe.

What’s the (Voting) Matter?
Alexa Schirtzinger

Rick Lass, director of the electoral-reform group Voting Matters, is tired of talking about ranked-choice voting. The system allows voters to rank candidates in order of preference, which advocates say ensures candidates are elected by majority vote, and increases voter participation.

In 2008, Santa Fe voters approved a city charter amendment that called for ranked-choice voting as well as publicly funded campaigns—but neither has actually been implemented. (Santa Fe City Clerk Yolanda Vigil says a fund has been started for publicly financed campaigns but hasn’t yet been used.)

“I’m frustrated that I still have to work on this!” Lass, a former Green Party candidate for Public Regulation Commissioner, tells SFR. “Once you win an election, you should get to see your results.”

Lass says he’s been urging the City Council to pass an ordinance to allow ranked-choice voting, but to no avail—even though cities such as Oakland, Calif., have implemented it with success.

But Vigil says the city’s current voting machines are a problem. “The present equipment approved by the Secretary of State, the M100 Tabulator that we rent from the county, does not have the software capabilities to do ranked-choice voting,” Vigil says.

Lass, however, says the city could purchase other machines and approve them via city ordinance—if the political will were there. “We voted for it,” Lass says. “Now it’s incumbent on the City Council and the mayor to make it happen."

Legislative Priorities

2010-12-29T13:59:00.000-08:00

Voting Matters has announced our 2011 legislative priorities. We are planning on focussing on three areas this session- Redistricting, Ballot Access, and Fair Ballots. Here are our position statements on the three.

In addition, we expect to support other election related bills, including banning political campaign contributions from state contractors and lobbyists, allowing election day voter registration, allowing parties to nominate candidates who are not party members (often called "fusion"), protecting and expanding public campaign financing, and others. More details will follow as the session unfolds.

1) Independent redistricting commissions

Fair elections are too easily skewed when sitting legislators are given control over how their district boundaries are drawn, or when a party in majority is allowed to draw congressional boundaries. Rather than call a costly special session of the legislature to draw district boundaries, which in all likelihood will end up in a drawn out court battle, it would be more prudent to appoint a nonpartisan or multipartisan task force with specific criteria to determine the new districts.

2) Ballot access and political party qualifications

New Mexico has some of the nation's most difficult provisions for non-major party candidates seeking to be on the ballot. In addition, statutes pertaining to qualifications of political parties are so ambiguous that they have been interpreted differently by different Attorneys General and Secretaries of State. At the very least, this language should be cleaned up to give potential parties and candidates a clear understanding of their requirements, and preferably, these requirements should be eased so as to give voters maximum choice on Election Day.

3) Eliminating Straight Party Ballot Option

The straight party option on NM ballots is confusing and discriminatory. There appears to be no mechanism in law allowing the straight party option to be included on the ballot, yet it is. Repeal of the relevant statute (section 1-12-53) in 2009 did not prevent the option from being included in 2010. And, oddly, in 2006 minor parties with candidates on the ballot had a straight party option, yet in 2008 they did not. In addition, there is general agreement among county clerks and election workers that the option is confusing to voters. It should be explicitly forbidden.

Count Every Vote New Mexico

2010-10-13T08:23:00.001-07:00

Once again, the folks at Election Protection and Common Cause are partnering to monitor elections in New Mexico, and across the country. Please call 1-866-OUR-VOTE if you encounter anything peculiar on Election Day or when voting early.

These are the same folks whose work led to the uncovering of so many irregularities during the 2004 election, which led to the Recount effort, and eventually to New Mexico's switch to paper ballots with meaningful audits.

They are also looking for people to volunteer to be poll watchers on Election Day. For more info or to volunteer, see www.commoncause.org

Speaking of Common Cause, their annual luncheon is this Saturday, October 16 at 12:00, at the UNM Continuing Education building. Professor Lonna Atkeson will be delivering the keynote. Reserve your spot via their website.

Hope to see you there!

Voting has begun

2010-10-06T07:10:00.000-07:00

One of the nicest things about elections in New Mexico is that there is ample opportunity to cast one's ballot. Voters can vote by mail or in person beginning four weeks before the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. So, beginning yesterday, October 5, voting season is underway.

Registered voters can request that an absentee ballot be mailed to their homes, and return them by mail by Election Day, or, go into the county clerk's office and fill out their ballots during regular business hours. Beginning October 16, many counties will also have early voting at "satellite" locations as well.

So, there is really no excuse for registered voters not to participate in elections. So study up on your candidates, constitutional amendments, and bond issues, and get on out and vote!

Last call- register to vote now

2010-10-03T08:44:00.000-07:00

Tuesday, October 5, is the last day to register to vote in time for this November's election. Make sure you are registered at your current address by calling your local county clerk's office, in Santa Fe that is 986-6280. And encourage your friends and neighbors to get registered in time!

Voting Matters has been working to eliminate this extra step in voting eligibility by supporting Election Day Registration, which would allow people to go and register on Election Day and cast their ballots, but so far we have seen only limited success at the legislature. You can be sure a similar bill will be introduced this year, and we will be there to support it.

We would like to go beyond even Election Day Registration, and support Universal Voter Registration, in which the government would take a more active role in voter registration. The "Motor Voter" drives in the 1990's were very effective at registering more voters, and there is no reason that the government can't register every person who comes in contact with the government: when they apply for college student loans, get drivers licenses, apply for government assistance, pay their taxes- you name it.

One of our goals at Voting Matters is 100% citizen participation in elections, and breaking down barriers to registration is an important step in achieving that goal.

Redistricting

2010-09-29T13:23:00.000-07:00

The New York Times has an interesting article on Congressional Redistricting today. One of the themes of the article is the importance of this year's election, and the impact an election of a Democratic or Republican governor will have on the process of redistricting in various states.

Of course, the unstated underlying premise is that Congressional seats are gerrymandered to ensure, or at least favor, election of members of certain political parties. This is true not only for Congress, but for state legislatures as well. The redistricting process in New Mexico after the 2000 census led to many rejected plans followed by a court battle, and there is little reason to think 2010 will be any different.

A plan calling for an independent redistricting commission has been introduced for the last few years, but can't make it through the House Voters and Elections Committee. It seems that our legislators are more interested in preserving their power bases than in creating a fair, participatory democracy.

An independent redistricting commission, and districts that are not gerrymandered as essentially incumbent protection plans would serve to increase interest in elections and voter participation. Both Voting Matters and the NM League of Women Voters will be supporting the creation of an independent redistricting commission in the upcoming legislature. We hope our legislators will look beyond their individual interests to see that a fair redistricting process is good for government and democracy.

Move To Amend Meeting this Thursday

2010-07-27T08:11:00.000-07:00

The local chapter of Move To Amend is meeting this Thurday to discuss the draft resolution and the strategy for moving forward with this campaign. Below is a letter from the steering committee inviting participation on this crucial campaign.

The resolution can be seen at www.corporatedownsizing.ning.com

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Greetings everyone,

We are excited to report that the SF Move to Amend Resolution sub-committee has been making progress and thanks to the good work of some of our amazing team members we now have our own unique local resolution to take to the streets on its way to City Council. We agreed at our first meeting to follow a progressive strategy that included the following general stages:

1. Local Campaign
-Launch a community education/outreach campaign to build wide-spread grassroots support (through the collection of individual, nonprofit, and business signatures in support of the resolution)
-Pass a City Resolution
-Pass a County Resolution

2. State-wide Campaign
-Share the Resolution and our organizing/training support with folks in other NM communities including cities, towns, & tribes
-Pass a Resolution through the State Legislature

We are having a follow-up Campaign Strategy meeting this Thursday at 7:45PM at Earth Care (1235 Siler Road, Suite D).

At this stage, we’d like to engage the larger group of Move to Amend volunteers and interested community members to help develop the strategy for this campaign and make it a reality. We also initiated a Study Group and would like others to join with us in the effort to educate and empower ourselves regarding this issue. A great way to begin this work is to sign up to our NM website where educational resources as well as information from our meetings, and the latest Move to Amend news from across the Country is available. There are working group areas set-up on the site for the Study Group, the Resolution, and the other groups we designated in previous meetings.

This will be an important tool as we coordinate this grassroots campaign here in Santa Fe. In part because it will allow the organizing effort to be much less centralized and much more democratic & participatory. So please sign-up and tell your friends and hopefully we’ll see some of you this Thursday.

In solidarity,
Move to Amend SF Coordinating Committee

Vote August 3

2010-07-22T11:24:00.000-07:00

Residents of Santa Fe's Community College District will be able to vote Tuesday, August 3, on a bond issue authorizing $35 million dollars to improvements to the existing campus as well as construction of another campus, dubbed the Higher Learning Center, at the site of the former College of Santa Fe.

Please visit sfcc.edu or lwvsfc.org for details about the election, and to santafecounty.gov to find your polling place. Early voting is going on at the college and the county building through next week.

Term Limits

2010-07-19T09:18:00.000-07:00

Last week, the Santa Fe County Commission voted 4-1 in favor of supporting a state constitutional amendment to change term limits for themselves from two four-year terms to three four-year terms.

Voting Matters does not support this change. We see holding office as a way to do public service, and oppose the trend of people becoming career politicians who serve for life. Instead, we would like to see term limits applied to the legislative branch as well as county offices and state executive branch positions.

Opponents of term limits say every election is an opportunity to oust an incumbent, but this simple minded attitude overlooks the incredible advantages of incumbency, from name recognition to fundraising ability to gerrymandered districts.

We support changes to our election code, but this is a step in the wrong direction.

Move To Amend

2010-07-06T12:36:00.000-07:00

The Independence Day Holiday brought together friends and neighbors, good food and good cheer, and the inevitable discussions of our democracy and our government.

Two recent Supreme Court decisions were in the air- Citizens United, which establishes corporate personhood, and McComish v. Bennett, which strikes down parts of Arizona's Public Campaign Financing law. Both shift power towards the moneyed interests and away from open and fair elections.

Arizona's Public Campaign Financing law was found by the Court to "chill" free speech spending by providing matching funds to participating candidates who are outspent by non-participating candidates or independent campaign committees. This is one of the key elements that hold together public campaign financing systems in states and municipalities around the country, as it ensures competitiveness and encourages participation.

Citizens United is even more broad and more damaging. It establishes as law the falsehood of corporate personhood by expanding first amendment rights to corporate spending on elections.

That is why Voting Matters is supporting a Constitutional Amendment clarifying that corporations are not the same thing as natural persons.
Please visit www.movetoamend.org to join the over 84,000 natural persons who have signed the motion in support of three principles to be included in the Amendment.
(1) To firmly establish that money is not speech, and that human beings, not corporations, are persons entitled to constitutional protections.
(2) To guarantee the right to vote and to participate, and have our votes and participation count.
(3) To protect local communities, economies, and democracies from illegitimate "preemption" by state national and global governments.

Green Party Candidate Petitions Denied

2010-06-26T07:45:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday, June 22, the office of the Secretary of State refused to accept petitions and filing papers from Green Party Congressional candidate Alan Woodruff. Interrim Director of Elections Don Franciisco Trujillo, the fifth person to hold the position in four years, declined to accept the petitions because the Green Party of New Mexico is no longer a qualified party, according to news reports.

If it is true that the Green Party is no longer a qualified party, then the Secretary of State has been in violation of the Election Code, which clearly states that upon making a determination that a political party is no longer qualified, they must notify the county clerks, who must then immediately notify all members of the party. Presumably, this is so party members can either join a qualified party or circulate petitions to requalify the party.

A few phone calls to county clerks revealed that the office of the Secretary of State has not notified them of the removal of the Green Party. A conversation with Don Francisco Trujillo also revealed that only the Libertarian Party is qualified to run candidates this year, also a clear violation of statute. Both the Independent Party and the Constitution party would remain qualified based on section 1-7-2 of the state election code, which says a party remains qualified for two elections after qualifying as a minor party, which both did during the 2008 election cycle.

These and other shenanigans have been going on ever since the Green Party qualified as the first new major party in New Mexico history back in 1994, when several of its candidates exceeded the 10% threshold to become a major party.

The state legislature has made it more difficult for minor party and independent candidates by moving up the date by which one must declare party membership and the candidate filing date, and attempted to make the major party threshold impossibly high.

And the Secretary of State and Attorney general's offices have colluded to reinterpret clear election law to all but eliminate the participation of minor party and independents from our elections.

As it stands, there will be very few contested elections in New Mexico in 2010, with 36 of 70 state house seats unopposed (yes, that is more than half!). Part of this is due to gerrymandered districts, but a large part of it is also due to our state's policy of shutting out voices of all but the socalled mainstream parties.

Personally, I am outraged by this attack on democracy, and I hope you are too.

Ballot Security

2010-06-21T09:57:00.000-07:00

Election workers in Rio Arriba County have done it again. According to stories in the Rio Grande Sun, www.riograndesun.com, ballot boxes have been illegally opened since the election.

According to the stories, Rio Arriba County Clerk, Moises Morales, opened ballot boxes in his office without the required supervision of the county canvassing board or a district judge. Recently reelected district judge Sheri Raphaelson signed an order allowing the ballot boxes to be opened, but did not stipulate when or where, nor did she ensure that she or a representative be present. It is not clear how the boxes were opened since the district court was supposed to have one of the two keys necessary to open the boxes.

The ballot boxes were apparently opened in search of missing absentee ballots, which should not have been there in the first place. Add this to the fact that Rio Arriba did not report election results until very late (after 2:00 AM), due to ballot boxes not being delivered promptly by precinct judges. This is the same county that saw an election judge take home and keep overnight three ballot boxes during the Democratic Presidential Caucus in 2008.

We have done great work to go to an all paper ballot system in New Mexico, including meaningful audits of elections. But apparently, we still have a long way to go to ensure that the ballots are secure on election day and through the canvassing and auditing period.

Primary Election

2010-06-08T17:14:00.001-07:00

Last week's primary saw a very low turnout, approximately 28% of eligible voters made it to the polls. And that 28% only includes people registered in one of New Mexico's two major parties, the Republicans and the Democrats. Another 200,000 New Mexicans are not even eligible to vote in primaries either because they are registered in other parties or they "decline to state" a party affiliation. Still more eligible voters have not even registered at all, meaning the percent of potential voters that participated in the primary this year is more like 10-15%.

How does the state justify spending over $4 million for an election in which only some taxpayers can participate? Considering the fact that about one out of three new registrants choose no party, it seems like time to change the way parties select their nominees.

The New Mexican's Steve Terrell has already brought up the idea of an open primary, in which any registered voter can vote in any party primary, but the parties are not too excited about letting "non-members" have a say in their decisionmaking process. Another idea being floated about is a "top-two" system, in which any voter can participate, and all the candidates for an office are listed together, with the top two vote getters, regardless of party, being listed on the general election ballot. This has been done in Washington state and is being looked at in other places.

We think the state legislature should take a good look at revamping the election system here in New Mexico. If all the taxpayers are funding these elections, then all voters should have a say. If the parties don't want to allow nonmembers into their nominating process, then the parties should pay for the elections themselves, as the Democrats do with their Presidential "caucus".

Whatever happens, we certainly need to do something to increase participation in our elections.

Municipal Election Recap

2010-03-08T09:16:00.000-08:00

Santa Fe- Neither Ranked Choice Voting nor Public Campaign Financing were used in this election, in spite of being approved by a vast majority of voters in 2008. Technological reasons are delaying Ranked Choice, as the ES&S machines used are not capable of performing the operation, and there is a reluctance to hand tally ballots after the election. As it turns out, all the contested races were won by the incumbents with a majority of the votes.

The Public Campaign Financing ordinance was passed by the council last fall, and is scheduled to begin with the 2012 election. However, there has been no appropriation to begin the fund, which by ordinance must have at least $300,000 in it at the beginning of the election cycle.

One interesting idea brought up as a campaign issue is at large districts for our council. Russell Simon suggested going to four council members elected from districts and four council members elected at large, meaning all voters have a vote for them as in mayor and judge elections. It is an idea worth investigating.

Las Vegas- The municipal home rule charter passed with 56%, and includes trraditional run off voting and a couple of other election code changes. There is some question in the city clerk's office as to whether this counts as an amendment to the existing charter, thereby requiring 60% to pass, but the Municipal League and others seem confident that since the new charter completely replaces the old one, it is a new charter and requires only 50% to pass.

Rio Rancho- Rio Rancho experimented with a new voting method on Election Day this year. Rather than having a polling place for each precinct, they had voting centers strategically placed around the city. Any city voter could go to any voting center and be given a ballot for their precinct.

Finally, as an election judge, I had several people ask me how they know their votes would be accurately tabulated. Our state has excellent audit requirements for state and federal elections, but none exist for municipal elections. I believe people would like to see municipal elections included in our audit laws and I hope we can see that come to pass over the next two years.

Legislative Session returns

2010-02-27T10:06:00.000-08:00

Round one of the legislative session ended last week and none of the bills we were following did very well. Round two starts Monday ad we don't expect any election related bills to be on the Governor's call.

Two positive outcomes were HB 198, which finally clarified ownership and maintenance responsibility for the state's voting machines purchased in 2006. Also passing was HB 127 which allows 16 and 17 year olds to serve as precinct workers.

The various bills to create a state ethics panel never really came together, and there will be an effort during the interim to clean them up and present them as a better bill in 2011.

HB 118, which would have banned political campaign contributions from contractors and lobbyists was left to die in Senate Rules Committee and will be back again next year.

Legislative Session

2010-02-08T11:49:00.000-08:00

Another week has passed at the legislature, and there has been some motion with election reform bills. With ten days to go, things are sure to heat up.

The ban on campaign contributions from lobbyists and contractors: HB 118 is now known as the committee substitute for HB 118 and moves on to the House Judiciary Committee where it could be heard as early as today.

Same day registration: HB 123 passed House Consumer and Public Affairs and moves to House Voters and Elections, where it is not yet scheduled. Its "companion bill" is Senate Bill 161 (John Sapien), which passed Senate Rules today and moves to Senate Judiciary. An attempt to attach a mandatory photo ID provision failed.

An "independent" redistricting commission resolution has been introduced as HJR 15 (Karen Giannini) and would appear on the November 2010 ballot as a Constitutional Amendment if it passes both houses. The amendment is problematic as written because it creates a commission that is actually bipartisan and not independent, with the members being appointed by the leaders of the legislature.

Rhonda King's continuing effort to resolve the state's purchase of voting machines in 2006 has been introduced as HB 198. It holds the counties harmless for the purchase and maintenance of the machines other than for ongoing storage. It will be heard in House Voters and Elections this week.

Public Campaign Financing: Both bills face uphill journeys on the Senate side. SB 51 (Eric Griego) would create a public campaign financing system for executive positions but has been scheduled to three committees. SB 67 (Feldman) would clarify the Voter Action Act but has not been ruled germane.

State Ethics Commission: There are a number of bills on both sides that address and implement a state Ethics Commission that are awaiting hearings in House Judiciary and Senate Rules Committees. This will almost certainly result in a compromise bill. Loyda Martinez of Common Cause has an opinion piece that outlines the essentials which I have copied below.

Ethics Commission

2010-02-08T11:42:00.000-08:00

--------------------
Albuquerque Journal
Sunday, February 07, 2010

Ensure Ethics Panel Can Make Difference

by Loyda Martinez, Board Member, Common Cause New Mexico

We're dipping into the last hectic days of another legislative session. As was the case last time around, we're faced with a half dozen different proposals to finally create an independent ethics commission in New Mexico. On the one hand, this is a good thing. It shows an enthusiasm among legislators to have New Mexico join 40 other states in establishing an independent, bipartisan body to field and investigate ethics complaints against public officials. Furthermore, all of the current bills are significantly better than the ethics commission bill that passed the House during the 2009 regular session.
On the other hand, the task of combining these various proposals into a single consensus bill is daunting. Luckily, Sen. Linda Lopez, who chairs the Senate Rules Committee, and Rep. Al Park, who chairs the House Judiciary Committee, seem to be up to the task. They both seek to gather the Senate and House versions of these bills, debate the fine points, and come up with one solid bill in each chamber to push through to the legislative finish line.
For good-government advocates, of course, the debate over the fine points is key. Basically, that debate comes down to balancing two equally valid values. First, the commission has to protect the due process rights of public officials accused of wrongdoing. If a commission is set up, it will inevitably receive frivolous complaints that need to be filed in the trash can where they belong. Yet at the same time, a commission must have enough teeth to launch serious investigations of nonfrivolous complaints. Otherwise, New Mexico would just be wasting money it doesn't have.
Balancing these two important values is difficult. Here are the elements Common Cause would like to see in an ideal ethics commission bill:
1) A good commission will have independent subpoena power to ensure the commission's access to key witnesses and relevant documents.
2) A simple majority quorum is the best way to ensure anything gets done. Although requiring a super-majority (or a super-super-majority) for the commission to take any action is tempting, this would be a very unusual step and might well result in a do-nothing commission.
3) Some level of confidentiality regarding ethics commission activities is appropriate to protect the right of respondents. Excessive secrecy, however, will decrease the legitimacy of the commission in the eyes of the public and make it impossible to judge the body's effectiveness. Ideally, only the initial complaint and investigation should be confidential. Once the commission determines that there is enough evidence to proceed to a formal hearing, there is no reason that the proceedings should not become public, and any ultimate finding of guilt or innocence should of course be published. A recent report from the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government does an excellent job of analyzing the issues presented by the excessive emphasis on confidentiality in the current crop of bills.
4) Several of the proposals give the accused access to legal counsel paid for by the state. Under these proposals, if the commission finds that an ethics violation has occurred, the accused has to reimburse the state for the cost of the legal defense. This sounds good on paper, but the expense to the state is unknown and could be quite substantial. By way of comparison, the New Mexico Judicial Standards Commission does not offer judges paid legal representation. It's conceivable that such a provision actually would discourage people from filing complaints with the commission because they would feel obligated to hire their own attorney to be on an equal footing with the respondent.
There are a couple other sticking points that aren't a huge concern to Common Cause but that have made it difficult to get a bill through both chambers and on the governor's desk. The big one is figuring out an appointment scheme for the commission that satisfies both the governor and the Legislature. Maybe splitting the appointments right down the middle is the best compromise — with a couple left over coming from the state Supreme Court.
In addition to investigating complaints against public officials, a good ethics commission would have several other duties. For one thing, it would be required to draft a code of ethics for the executive branch, which currently doesn't have one. A commission could also conduct trainings for officials and state employees to help instill a culture of ethics in New Mexico government. Finally, the commission would need to issue advisory opinions to answer questions by government officials about whether or not a specific kind of behavior is or isn't ethical.
Can we finally come together and get this done?

Corporate personhood

2010-01-31T06:27:00.000-08:00

Another busy week ahead at the New Mexico Legislature- House Bills 118 and 123 both have hearings scheduled on Tuesday. HB 123 is the Same Day Registraion bill in House Consumer Affairs, and HB 118 will be heard again in House Voters and Elections. HB 118 was tabled Thursday, mostly due to the fact that a 'committee substitute' was introduced that morning and legislators wanted more time to study it.

But some of the opposition to HB 118 are already arguing that the recent Supreme Court decision in 'Citizens United' makes prohibiting campaign contributions unconstitutional. This isn't true, because Citizens United only rules on independent expenditures, not direct contributions.

We believe Citizens United is a horrible decision, and that is why Voting Matters has joined over 50,000 individuals and organizations in signing on to the Move To Amend. The goal of the movement is to amend the US Constitution to specifically declare that corporations are not persons and do not share in the rights of persons. The ball is moving, and we urge you to go to www.movetoamend.org, sign on to the petition, and get involved in what may be the political struggle of our generation.

Lobbyist and Contractor Contribution Ban

2010-01-26T10:54:00.000-08:00

Last week, I mentioned two Senate Bils that would reduce the effect of big money interests in New Mexico elections. On the House side, they managed to wrap both bills into one, and make some improvements. HB 118 was introduced by Representative Jose Campos, chair of the House Voters and Elections Committee. HB 118 will be heard in House Voters and Elections on Thursday morning at 8:30 in room 317. Voting Matters encourages a Do Pass recommendation from the committee.

Same Day Voter Registration

2010-01-24T08:12:00.000-08:00

Representative Jim Trujillo (D-Santa Fe) has introduced HB 123. HB 123 would allow early voters the oportunity to register to vote and vote on the same day. Unfortunately, the provision does not apply on Election Day.

Voting Matters has long upported repealing the provision of law that requires voter registration 28 days before an election, and HB 123 is a step in the right direction. While we would have preferred a bill that abolishes the 28 day provision altogether, we do support HB 123 and hope it will lead to even further easing in the process of voter registration and participation.

Statistics bear out that states which allow Election Day Registration have higher rates of voter participation than those that prohibit it.

Likewise, we wonder why the process of registering to vote is made so difficult. Instead, we'd like to see our government facilitate the process. Voter participation would increase if the govenrment removed the additional hurdle of requiring voters to register themselves.

Why shouldn't a person become registered to vote when they first interact with the government- when they get a job and start paying taxes, or apply for government services or a driver's license, or graduate high school? These are certainly viable solutions and we hope the conversation will change from same day registration to universal voter registration.

2010 Legislative Session

2010-01-21T09:28:00.000-08:00

The legislative session began Tuesday at noon, and will last 30 days this year. While it is always uncertain what electoral reforms will be discussed, we know several bills will be forthcoming in the realm of governmental ethics. Senate Bill 43 and House Bill 43 would create a state ethics commission to create standards and investigate complaints against elected and appointed state officials.

Three bills we at Voting Matters are actively supporting are Senate Bills 48, 49, and 51. Senate Bill 48, introduced by Tim Keller, would prohibit campaign contributions by state contractors. Senate Bill 49, introduced by Eric Griego, would likewise prohibit donations from business entities and lobbyists.

Senate Bill 51, also introduced by Senator Griego, would expand the Voter Action Act to include state executive and legislative candidates. The Voter Action Act is the law that implements the public campaign financing system for Public Regulation Commission and certain Judicial candidates.

These are three solid reforms to our election system that will reduce the effect of big money on our government decision making process and we will be following them closely in the weeks to come.

Party Primary Expenses

2009-12-19T07:20:00.000-08:00

In Wednesday's Farmington Daily Times, New Mexico Secretary of State Mary Herrera reports that her office is lacking the funds to pay for next year's major Party Primaries. She estimates the cost at about $4 million.

This raises an interesting question. Why is the state paying for an election that includes only select voters? According to statistics published at the Secretary of State's website www.sos.state.nm.us, there are 201,000 voters who choose to register in a minor party, or no party at all. That means that nearly 20% of all registered voters are prohibited from voting in primary elections.

So we put out the question- does the funding and the process of party primaries need to be reformed?

What if they held an election and noone showed up to vote?

2009-11-30T12:20:00.000-08:00

That may sound like a rhetorical question in a nation that prides itself on democracy, but unfortunately 2009 elections turnout has been abysmal. Last week's special election to extend a Santa Fe county tax for fire and emergency services attracted only 2108 voters, according to official results posted at the county's website. Last March, only about 8500 citizens bothered to vote in an election to raise the tax on certain home sales in the city.

Holding these special elections costs the government between $30,000 and $60,000, and deal with important "pocketbook issues", yet the vast majority of our community either wasn't aware or wasn't concerned enough to cast a vote. These days, it couldn't be easier to vote. Voting on Election Day, voting early, and voting absentee are all options for people.

At Voting Matters, we'd like to see maximum voter participation in all of our elections. During the last session, the legislature considered a bill which would allow consolidation of school district and community college elections, which also have notoriously low participation. This would be an improvement. Alternately, special elections could be eliminated, and ballot questions should be included on the general election ballot.

We think it is time to bring everything to the table for consideration. Countries with higher voter participation should be studied, with the best solutions imported onto our elections. Some ideas worth considering are election day registration, election day holiday, fining nonvoters, and better election systems. One friend suggests we have neighborhood voting temples, shrines to democracy if you will, where all of us are expected to make regular pilgrimages.

Sounds like a good idea.

Straight Party Voting

2009-11-22T15:01:00.000-08:00

Friday's edition of "New Mexico Politics with Joe Monahan" (www.joemonahansnewmexico.blogspot.com) reports that there are not yet any Republican candidates for state executive branch positions of auditor, treasurer, or attorney general. Mr Monahan points out that in a state that is predominately Democrats, it is unlikely a Republican can win, though at the same time he mentions that there is a Republican Land Commissioner, and Republicans have held other state offices in past years.

We pointed out on this blog recently the inherently unfair districts created for US Congress, state legislators and county commissioners, districts intentionally designed to keep incumbents in office and maintain the balance of power essentially as it is now. While statewide offices do not share that problem, one contributing factor of this near one party rule in New Mexico is the straight party ballot option.

In New Mexico and many other states, general election ballots are printed with the option of selecting "Democrat" or "Republican", resulting in a vote for all of the candidates of that party. While this option may have had some validity in previous centuries, when information about particular candidates was harder to come by, in today's age of websites, mass mailings, and mass media, the straight party option has lost its usefulness.

Problematically, the straight party option is not only not useful, it may actually contribute to voter confusion. A look at random ballots from the 2006 general election revealed many instances of voters not understanding what that ballot option means. Many voters selected the straight party option and then went on to vote for all or some of that party's candidates in specific races, perhaps thinking the party line was asking to which party they belong. While this confusion resulted in unnecessary and redundant selections, at least they did not cancel those votes, as they had when voting on touch screen voting machines in past years.

In fact, the straight party option does not appear to be legal. Nothing in statute or in the Secretary of State's administrative rules specifies that the ballot contain a straight party line, and the decision of which parties are listed has been applied inconsistently.

Repeated attempts to eliminate this practice have been unsuccessful, as chairwomen Linda Lopez of the Senate Rules Committee has refused to even grant relevant bills hearings. One would think that if there is merit to keeping the straight party option on the ballot, its proponents would be willing to state those reasons openly.

We believe that our state's legislators and executives should do more to help voters make intelligent choices, but apparently they are content with a system that eliminates their need to campaign on the strength of their ideas.

You win some, you lose some

2009-11-16T11:46:00.000-08:00

Ranked Choice Voting went one win, one loss last week in two separate city council decisions. On the other side of the Sangres, the Las Vegas city council approved a draft home rule municipal charter that includes Ranked Choice Voting for future local elections. The proposed charter will go before voters March 2, 2010.

But here in Santa Fe, the city council approved an election resolution that does not include Ranked Choice.

As outlined in a previous posting on this site, Santa Fe city clerk Yolanda Vigil and attorney Frank Katz conducted a thorough demonstration of Ranked Choice Voting that showed it can be done using existing machines. Nonetheless, they decided against implementation for reasons outlined in an October 29 memo to councillors.

Voting Matters has been encouraging the city to make necessary election code changes that would accommodate Ranked Choice Voting, such as increasing the canvassing period to ten days to allow time to conduct the runoff. But now the election is just around the corner and the council would probably not be able to make changes before the March 2010 election.

Ranked Choice Voting was approved by 65% of the voters after passing through three city committees and approval by a unanimous vote of the council. The city failed to act, and failed the residents of Santa Fe in this regard. It is unfortunate that they chose not to implement the clear will of the majority of Santa Feans.

Banning Political Campaign Contributions from Lobbyists and Government Contractors

2009-11-11T07:58:00.000-08:00

Think New Mexico, www.thinknewmexico.com, a multipartisan think tank based in Santa Fe, has just released a report on the influence of private money on our government. The report highlights historic and current scandals involving government contractors and those who lobby for them. Much has been in the news lately about “pay to play” politics, from the very top of state government to municipal and school board administrations, and the Think New Mexico report offers an effective solution to this abuse of tax payer monies.

Think New Mexico has correctly identified the mood of the electorate. In recent years, the legislature has enacted a gift ban and public campaign financing mechanisms for certain state offices. In addition, several municipalities have enacted campaign contribution limits and their own public campaign financing systems, all designed to limit the influence of private money on public decisions. Other areas of the country are also clamping down on rampant campaign spending by special interests, such as Humboldt California's complete ban on campaign donations by non-local corporate entities, commonly referred to as Measure T www.duhc.org

The New Mexico legislation, which has yet to be written, would ban campaign donations by anyone receiving government contracts or subsidies, as well as all registered lobbyists. The legislation would include all state, county and municipal elections. It is clearly a step towards restoring citizen confidence in our governments, and Voting Matters will be supporting and reporting on this issue as it moves forward.

Public Campaign Financing in Albuquerque's Municipal Election

2009-11-07T19:30:00.001-08:00

According to the New Mexico Independent www.newmexicoindependent.com, and other sources, the public campaign financing system used in last month's Albuquerque municipal election was a great success. This was the second time the system has been used in Albuquerque elections, and the first to feature the mayor's race. All three of the mayoral candidates participated in the system, which limited their spending to the $325,000 each received form the public campaign financing fund established by the city.

“The system worked as intended,” says Steve Allen, executive director of Common Cause, a government watchdog group. “It cut corrupting special interest money out of the mayoral campaign so that the eventual winner would not have to feel beholden to large private donors rather than the citizens of Albuquerque.”

The article goes on to address the role PACs played in the election and to discuss possible improvements to the city's oversight role. Another point of consideration is whether the system is too difficult to qualify for,as two well known potential candidates failed to gather enough $5 contributions. We look forward to the city's analysis of the system.

It's Time for an Independent Redistricting Commission

2009-11-01T10:47:00.000-08:00

I just received the monthly newsletter from NonProfit Votes and it contained some good information on independent redistricting commissions. With the 2010 census coming up, and a likely shifting of Congressional districts, now is a very good time to be considering how we draw district lines here in New Mexico. Everyone is familiar with the cynical expression, “it is not who votes, but who counts the votes” that determines election outcomes. The same can be said about who draws the boundary lines in single seat, winner takes all elections.

For example, New Mexico's Public Regulation Commission is composed of five voting districts that vary from 144,000 voters in district 4 to 272,000 voters in district 3. That means one commissioner represents nearly twice as many constituents as another equally powerful commissioner.

In addition to this discrepancy, NM PRC district 3 is composed of 58% Democrats and 27% Republicans, while neighboring District 2 is about 45% Republicans to 40% Democrats (the other 15% of voters are in another party or no party). Of the five districts, four heavily favor Democrats to the point that some districts frequently have uncontested elections after the major party primaries.

This phenomenon carries over to our state legislature even more dramatically. Usually, about half of the seats in our state house and senate go unopposed in the general election. In fact, unless a representative opts to retire, reelection is almost a foregone conclusion.

We are glad we are not alone in thinking this is a problem. Earlier this year, the League of Women Voters of New Mexico published a position calling for the use of standard, meaningful criteria for redistricting. In addition, they support the establishment of an independent redistricting commission to draw boundaries after each census.

Fortunately, we have some momentum to build on. In 2008, at the request of Voting Matters, a Senate Joint Memorial (SJM 23), was introduced by Senators Grubesic and Adair, a Democrat and a Republican. The legislation would have established a study group to look at redistricting and make recommendations to the legislature. The Memorial passed the Senate but died in the House Voters and Elections Committee. Now, the time for memorials and studies is past, and the 2010 legislature needs to create a multipartisan redistricting commission in time for 2012 elections.

Ranked Choice Voting in Santa Fe

2009-10-21T09:35:00.000-07:00

On Monday, Santa Fe city clerk Yolanda Vigil conducted a demonstration of whether it would be possible to conduct a Ranked Choice Voting runoff using existing voting machines and software. Ranked Choice was adopted by city voters in March 2008, with the condition that it could be done using machines, at a reasonable cost. Voting machines used in New Mexico are not capable of taking a ballot image, which would make runoff tabulation simple. Machines that are capable of doing so are not certified for use here, so, tallying a runoff will require a good deal of hand sorting of ballots and then feeding some ballots through the machines a second or third time.

The reason for the demonstration was to determine whether this method of vote tallying would be consistent with the charter and other laws, and whether it would be possible to conduct the runoff in a timely and efficient manner. The city is expected to have a decision by November 10, the date that the March municipal election is officially 'proclaimed'.

Thanks also go out to Automated Election Services www.electionpeople.com for providing the ballots and memory cartridges and to Santa Fe county for providing machines and staff for the demonstration. After some preliminary discussions about voter education, how the runoff fits in with other election duties like the canvass, and how to deal with other issues such as overvotes and undervotes, the demonstration began.

Fifty ballots were marked for the demonstration, including three separate races with four candidates each. The ballots were then fed into the voting machine (ES&S model M100). This part of the process represents Election Day. “Election Day” results showed that a runoff would be required for the Mayor's race between Elvis Presslee(17), John Knee Cash (16), Alher Acain (10), and Sue B Honey (6), since none of those candidates received a majority. The next step was to remove the ballots from the ballot box and sort them into four piles based on first choice selections marked on the ballot (noted above in parentheses).

At this point, a new cartridge was placed in the voting machine, and ballots listing Sue B Honey were fed into the machine. The second choice votes were added to the previous totals, and still no candidate had over 50% of the vote total. Those ballots were then set aside, and the ballots listing Alher Acain as first choice were fed into the machine, adding those second choices.

In addition, any ballots listing Alher Acain and Sue B Honey as the first two choices were tallied counting the third choice votes on those ballots, by inserting a new memory cartridge and feeding those ballots through the machine. Now the tally could be finalized, and Elvis Presslee won with 28 votes compared with 21 for John Knee Cash. (one ballot was spoiled because the voter made two selections for first choice).

The conclusion: it is possible to conduct a runoff using Ranked Choice Voting as adopted by the city. There are some logistical issues that need to be resolved. There is nothing to prevent the city from implementing Ranked Choice that can't be resolved through administrative rules or an ordinance.

We at Voting Matters certainly hope that Santa Fe will implement Ranked Choice Voting for the March 2010 election, which appears very likely to have more than two candidates in at least two of the five races on the ballot.

Public Campaign Financing system approved for Santa Fe Municipal Elections

2009-10-15T21:45:00.000-07:00

Wednesday night, the Santa Fe city council passed an ordinance creating a system of public campaign financing for municipal elections. It is based on the state's Voter Action Act and Albuquerque's system of publicly financed campaigns. Albuquerque's recent municipal election had all three mayoral candidates and a majority of council candidates using public campaign financing.

Beginning in Santa Fe's 2012 election, if candidates for city council and municipal judge successfully petition to get on the ballot and collect enough qualifying contributions to show they have a level of community support, they will receive $15,000 to run their campaigns, if they also agree not to accept any other donations. In 2014, the system will be expanded to include the mayor's race.

Santa Fe has considered public campaign financing since the adoption of its charter in 1997. Public campaign financing is one of seven amendments to our city charter passed by the voters in March 2008. It is great that the city council followed through and established a meaningful system to minimize big money contributions to political candidates while ensuring that candidates have a substantial amount of community support before receiving any public monies.