THE FOOTBALL FIGHT: Some are calling for scaling back of the NMSU football program. Photo courtesy of New Mexico State sports.

The New Mexico State football team hasn’t played in a bowl game since 1960.

The Aggies haven’t fielded a team with a winning record since 2002 and attendance has slipped.

Now the hottest debate on the Las Cruces campus is whether the football team should keep playing at the college football’s highest level , consider going down a step or even be abolished altogether.

From the Albuquerque Journal on Monday (May 20):

LAS CRUCES – Members of the New Mexico State University community are pushing back against Regents Chairman Mike Cheney’s public exhortation that Aggies support athletics, in particular the long-struggling football program.

A petition on the website change.org urges the five-member Board of Regents to “stop diverting funds from academics to support failing athletics programs.” The petition, launched last Monday, had been signed by more than 300 people, including alumni and current students, by Friday.

Earlier this month before he was selected as NMSU’s new president, Garrey Carruthers floated the idea of having the Aggies moved down a notch to the Big Sky Conference.

“They’re not eligible for BCS bowls,” Carruthers told the Las Cruces Sun-News. “But what do you think our prospects of getting (to) a BCS bowl anytime soon will be anyway? Not great. I think there’s some other conferences around, where our athletics budget would actually be at the top of the list instead of at the bottom in terms of how much money we’re spending.”

In the meantime, the Aggies will play this coming season as an independent — after the Western Athletic Conference essentially imploded as a football conference — and in 2014 will play in the Sun Belt Conference.

THE IRS IS WATCHING: In its investigation of the Albuquerque Tea Party, the Internal Revenue Service wanted more information about this 83-year-old retiree.

The Internal Revenue Service not only wanted a wide variety of information from the Albuquerque Tea Party‘s application for non-profit status, it also wanted to know what contacts it had with people from other political organizations too.

That included an 83-year-old great-grandmother who was once held in a World War II internment camp, New Mexico Watchdog has discovered.

“I’ve always paid my taxes and everything,” Marianne Chiffelle told New Mexico Watchdog. “What I do think is, it doesn’t surprise me…because of this government we have at the moment.”

According to a review of documents conducted by the online news organization Politico, (in a story headlined “The IRS wants YOU — to share everything”), the IRS asked the Albuquerque Tea Party about connections to other groups, including “Marianne Chiffelle’s Breakfasts.”

That prompted us to do some digging.

It took New Mexico Watchdog less than an hour to learn that “Marianne Chiffelle’s Breakfasts” is not some restaurant chain, but a reference to the volunteer work of Chiffelle, a retiree who helps organize informal 9 a.m. meetings for members of the Bernalillo County Republican Party.

The group meets on Fridays at the Golden Corral restaurant at the corner of Eubank and Central.

“We’ve had these meetings for a long time,” Chiffelle said. “It’s not a business.”

Chiffelle is a naturalized American citizen who was born in what was then called the Dutch East Indies, now known as Indonesia. Her father was an executive for Shell Oil and when World War II broke out Chiffelle was sent to a Japanese internment camp between the ages of 12 to 16.

After the war, she moved to the Netherlands and in 1960 she and her late husband immigrated to the United States.

BETWEEN THE LINES: A page from the coloring book the Children’s Freedom Scholarship Fund hands out to kids in Albuquerque.

Since living in Albuquerque, Chiffelle has been active in GOP politics and conservative causes. She helped establish the Children’s Freedom Scholarship Fund, which hands out patriotic coloring books to youngsters in the Albuquerque area.

“The kids don’t have any idea, they think freedom is just there for the taking,” Chiffelle said.

The book includes pictures of U.S. presidents and puzzles for kids to learn about U.S. history, as well as essays such as “What Does Freedom Mean to You?”

New Mexico Watchdog obtained a copy of the coloring book and found nothing advocating for certain political parties or organizations.

Recent entries on Chiffelle’s Facebook page include a link to a call for cuts in salaries to members of Congress, the vice president and president, as well as a petition to send a sympathy card to those affected by the killings at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

While no fan of the Obama administration, Chiffelle says she is no pitchfork-wielding, anti-government type.

“The fact itself that you have to pay tax(es) to the government is okay,” she said. “But the way they interpret it and you how many rules there are, that’s wrong.”

The IRS is embroiled in a national scandal after revealing that it has targeted tea party and conservative groups for extra scrutiny when they applied for non-profit, 501(c)4 status. The Albuquerque Tea Party is one of the organizations that’s been wrangling with the IRS since 2009.

“They (the IRS) have a job to do, I understand that,” Albuquerque Tea Party president Rick Harbaugh told New Mexico Watchdog. “I think they overstepped that a lot.” Clarification: Some readers have asked how the IRS got the phrase “Marianne Chiffelle Breakfasts” in the first place. Harbaugh says his group gave the IRS the name after the agency asked them to disclose all connections to political entities.

The Politico story mentioned the IRS also wanted the Albuquerque Tea Party to supply more information about a group called Conspiracy Brews.

An internet search revealed that Conspiracy Brews is a weekly meeting of Albuquerque political types that was founded by Janice Arnold-Jones — a former Republican nominee for Congress, member of the state legislature and current Albuquerque City Council member.

“It’s just a discussion group,” Arnold-Jones said. “When the group named itself it was done in the interests of a conspiracy for good government…it leans conservative but it’s an interesting mix of people. Our only rule is, when people speak you have to listen.”

“I attended just one meeting,” Harbaugh said.

The website design for Conspiracy Brews is simple and New Mexico Watchdog found no anti-government rhetoric on the site.

Arnold-Jones said she does not lead the group and it’s “not a taxable entity of any sort.”

New Mexico Watchdog counted 25 attendees at the group’s weekly Saturday meeting — including Chiffelle, who is a regular.

The Politico story mentioning Conspiracy Brews and Chiffelle prompted some jokes but also some serious discussion.

“The part I’m not delighted about,” Arnold-Jones said, “is the fact that the IRS is picking and choosing (whom to investigate) … I think this is an incredible erosion of trust.”

As for Chiffelle, having her name mentioned as part of the IRS investigation has drawn more attention than she’s accustomed to but she seemed genuinely unperturbed.

“Don’t cut me short,” Chiffelle said. “I was a prisoner of war in the second world war. If the Japanese couldn’t kill me, no one else can. That’s my philosophy. If something is unfair, I will fight to the death…Nothing upsets me. But I’ll do something about it.”

Here’s our interview with Chiffelle:

THE SPENDING BATTLE: A New Mexico Watchdog investigation shows most universities in the state are spending more on institutional support than academic support.

Do universities in New Mexico spend too much money on what’s called “institutional support” compared to academic support and instruction?

A New Mexico Watchdog investigation into schools of higher education in the state shows that in an 11-year period, spending for services associated with running a university has almost uniformly risen much faster than spending on education and academics in general.

Here’s what we found after looking at spending at New Mexico’s six public universities, using figures that schools across the country give to the U.S. Department of Education through its data system (Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System or IPEDS), that goes back to the 2000-2001 academic year:

Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction UNM 99.8% 56.7% 79.4% NMSU 78.5% 69.2% 60.3% NM Tech 107.8% -4.7% 47.4% NM Highlands 62.3% 21.6% 19.5% Eastern NM 65.0% 66.6% 72.6% Western NM 99.6% 41.5% 103.2%

Generally speaking, standard expense categories across the country define “institutional support” as administrative services, executive management, legal and fiscal operations, public relations, etc. Academic support is commonly associated with classwork, libraries, etc. and instruction generally refers to activities directly related to instruction including faculty salaries and benefits, office supplies and administration of academic departments.

With the exception of Western New Mexico University and Eastern New Mexico University, “institutional support” saw the greatest growth, with New Mexico Tech seeing a 107.8 percent increase in little more than a decade while academic support actually saw a decrease at Tech during that time frame.

Another interesting wrinkle is that back in 2000-01, academic spending and institutional spending at the two largest universities in the state (the University of New Mexico and New Mexico State) were just about identical but in the succeeding years institutional spending rose 99.8 percent at UNM and 78.5 percent at NMSU compared to 56.7 percent in academic spending at UNM and 69.2 percent at NMSU. (You can see the year-to-year breakdown of all six schools at the bottom of this story.)

The figures don’t come as a surprise to Jonathan Robe, a research fellow at the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, which takes a critical look at what the D.C.-based organization calls “the rising costs and stagnant efficiency in higher education.”

“Some of these numbers (in New Mexico) are in line with national numbers,” Robe said, citing a recent paper showing that for every dollar public research universities in the U.S. spend on what’s called involuntary spending, they spend $2 on voluntary spending.

“A lot of this is going to support administrative staff and salaries rather than education and that may give the public pause,” Robe said.

New Mexico Watchdog e-mailed all six universities for comment and received responses from officials UNM and NMSU.

The senior vice president for administration and finance at NMSU, Angela Throneberry, said the IPEDS finance survey changed between 2001 and 2011 so “making any direct comparison between the two periods (is) inaccurate” and that NMSU’s “allocation of Instruction and General expenditures by function has actually remained fairly consistent over the last 10 years.”

A spokesperson for UNM pointed to data the New Mexico Council of University President’s “Performance Effectiveness Plan” showing that UNM is below peers on administrative costs – 5.8 percent of budget compared to 8.1 percent.

UNM Regent Bradley Hosmer said in an e-mail that “The three categories used in IPEDS are not carefully defined” and that “significant sums can be moved from one category to another inadvertently.”

In fact, New Mexico Watchdog originally tried to simply look at whether there had been a significant increase in the number of administrators at New Mexico universities in recent years but the numbers within individual schools fluctuated — sometimes wildly — from year to year.

Robe conducted a quick search for New Mexico Watchdog at UNM, NMSU and New Mexico Highlands since 1993 and came back with numbers that varied so much from year to year that the whole dataset for judging who is defined as a full-time executive was called into question:

Full-time executives       1993 2001 2007 2011 NMHU 35 N/A 39 44 UNM 81 92 642 129 NMSU 47 35 97 310

“The problem with tracking administrators,” Robe said, “is that their positions are defined by what the institutions want to say it is.”

The numbers are so mushy that the new president of the University of Minnesota made headlines six months ago when, after pledging to cut administrative overhead, he learned his own school officials couldn’t tell him how much money it takes to run the school.

“The more questions I asked, the less happy I was,” Dr. Eric Kaler told the Wall Street Journal, which discovered through its own investigation that the University of Minnesota system had added more than 1,000 administrators since 2001.

UNM’s Hosmer echoed the sentiments about the shifting numbers in a brief interview during a recent Board of Regents meeting about the NM Watchdog investigation.

“You gotta get down below those labels,” Hosmer said, adding that “we don’t know how carefully (the IPEDS numbers) are monitored.”

Update 5/23: UNM director communication Dianne Anderson sent New Mexico Watchdog a chart composed by the Wall Street Journal of administrative costs at 72 public universities with high research activity. It showed that UNM scored at 5 percent in 2010-2011 in administrative spending as to the total percent spent per student — putting it on the lower end of the schools surveyed: http://graphics.wsj.com/documents/NONCLASS1212/

The tug-of-war on institutional vs. academic spending comes at a time when college tuitions keep rising, student debt is spiraling and critics are questioning whether universities have lost sight of their ultimate mission — and in some cases, wondering if college is even the right choice for some students.

“It really isn’t the cost of college,” said Dr. Richard Vedder, who heads the Center for College Affordability and Productivity. “It’s the cost relative to what you’re getting out of it. The data still show the incomes of people who go to college exceeds those of people who have just a high school education but we are finding a growing part of our labor force who go to college and are ending up unable to get jobs in professional, technical and managerial levels.”

Last month, another New Mexico Watchdog investigation showed IPEDS data revealing that tuition had increased between 87.8 percent to 169 percent at the state’s six public universities since the 1999-2000 school year.

A longtime professor at Johns Hopkins, Benjamin Ginsberg, has written a book called “The Fall of The Faculty,” that decries what he says is rampant growth of the number of administrators at the nation’s universities and former U.S. Secretary of Education William Bennett just published his own book, bluntly entitled “Is College Worth It?” that charges that “most of higher education fails most students.”

It’s selling so briskly that at the time of this story, the book is temporarily out of stock on Amazon.com.

Others have criticized what they say is unnecessarily luxurious facilities on college campuses while just this week, The Chronicle of Higher Education reported the median salary of public university presidents rose 4.7 percent in 2011-12 to more than $440,000 a year.

“More people from different political perspectives — anywhere from the Tea Parties to Occupy Wall Street — are talking about colleges and universities,” Robe said. “Colleges get revenue for federal aid but who gets stuck? … The spending increases may be justifiable but I think the public would like to see leaders make the case more transparently, rather than vague explanations that ‘education is important.’ ”

Hosmer cautions against making comparisons between one New Mexico university and another. “NM Tech competes with a somewhat different peer group (than UNM),” he said in an e-mail, “as does NMSU and others.”

But after going over some of the numbers with New Mexico Watchdog at the UNM Board of Regents meeting, Hosmer said, “You’re asking very good questions.”

****

Here’s the breakdown among the six New Mexico schools:

NMHU       Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $3,793,350 $2,448,479 $16,768,996 2001-2002 $3,622,613 $2,558,039 $17,519,333 2002-2003 $4,677,762 $2,187,066 $16,290,997 2003-2004 $4,494,277 $2,371,249 $15,908,331 2004-2005 $5,209,917 $2,323,569 $17,216,728 2005-2006 $4,553,224 $2,376,621 $15,463,559 2006-2007 $5,434,194 $2,530,580 $15,182,620 2007-2008 $5,388,681 $2,691,979 $16,144,439 2008-2009 $5,974,463 $2,910,961 $17,005,859 2009-2010 $6,724,733 $3,129,486 $20,523,068 2010-2011 $6,157,419 $2,978,361 $20,036,962         difference       since 00-01: $2,364,069 $529,882 $3,267,966   62.3% 21.6% 19.5%                 NM Tech       Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $3,292,573 $1,811,506 $11,402,164 2001-2002 $4,733,137 $1,310,578 $11,308,483 2002-2003 $5,154,904 $1,349,791 $12,135,546 2003-2004 $5,545,305 $1,604,429 $12,630,027 2004-2005 $5,784,312 $1,801,560 $14,523,612 2005-2006 $6,422,882 $2,223,930 $14,197,970 2006-2007 $7,106,023 $2,116,909 $15,007,271 2007-2008 $5,900,650 $2,092,905 $15,471,082 2008-2009 $6,178,685 $1,694,439 $15,554,407 2009-2010 $6,159,402 $1,552,035 $15,610,993 2010-2011 $6,842,150 $1,726,467 $16,816,894         difference       since 00-01: $3,549,577 ($85,039) 5,414,730   107.8% -4.7% 47.4%                 NMSU main campus     Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $14,584,310 $14,337,211 $72,108,810 2001-2002 $15,391,028 $14,376,207 $77,577,646 2002-2003 $15,221,125 $14,049,715 $79,554,872 2003-2004 $15,761,127 $15,062,394 $79,905,403 2004-2005 $18,270,978 $15,674,482 $82,714,176 2005-2006 $19,412,822 $17,557,869 $85,741,239 2006-2007 $21,446,363 $17,214,608 $89,078,923 2007-2008 $22,558,108 $19,152,909 $95,266,026 2008-2009 $26,425,116 $19,374,872 $117,602,394 2009-2010 $24,227,388 $22,781,073 $114,861,668 2010-2011 $26,045,283 $24,261,560 $115,629,162         difference $11,460,913 $9,885,353 $43,520,352 since 00-01: 78.5% 69.2% 60.3%                         UNM main campus     Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $26,516,746 $28,018,896 $142,816,521 2001-2002 $26,187,137 $24,850,603 $158,028,139 2002-2003 $27,910,675 $28,345,813 $161,488,418 2003-2004 $28,135,850 $28,330,645 $168,339,906 2004-2005 $41,932,810 $32,553,543 $174,546,367 2005-2006 $44,374,858 $32,960,478 $180,883,499 2006-2007 $47,488,796 $35,840,449 $191,619,655 2007-2008 $53,346,011 $37,195,835 $207,618,525 2008-2009 $55,701,218 $40,199,774 $219,751,778 2009-2010 $53,691,519 $45,837,066 $263,204,448 2010-2011 $53,004,937 $43,916,344 $256,292,554         difference $26,488,191 $15,897,448 $113,476,033 since 00-01: 99.8% 56.7% 79.4%                         WNMU       Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $2,479,945 $1,593,830 $8,534,299 2001-2002 $3,264,299 $1,567,434 $9,478,925 2002-2003 $3,479,069 $1,712,334 $9,965,572 2003-2004 $3,387,329 $1,851,925 $11,565,563 2004-2005 $3,367,948 $1,954,252 $11,904,618 2005-2006 $3,776,586 $1,843,903 $12,900,093 2006-2007 $3,519,301 $1,329,622 $14,087,325 2007-2008 $3,599,931 $1,489,186 $14,399,808 2008-2009 $3,766,316 $1,466,514 $13,853,903 2009-2010 $4,494,358 $2,353,036 $17,367,459 2010-2011 $4,948,755 $2,254,531 $17,342,045         difference $2,468,810 $660,701 $8,807,746 since 00-01: 99.6% 41.5% 103.2%                         ENMU main campus     Spending increases between 2000-01 and 2010-11     Institutional Support Academic Support Instruction 2000-2001 $3,900,729 $2,820,309 $13,143,457 2001-2002 $4,322,554 $2,954,568 $13,709,065 2002-2003 $6,849,996 $3,214,738 $14,138,346 2003-2004 $3,875,579 $3,063,926 $15,108,747 2004-2005 $4,018,366 $3,384,525 $15,312,827 2005-2006 $4,145,199 $3,652,550 $16,171,018 2006-2007 $4,510,121 $3,288,498 $16,879,791 2007-2008 $5,120,043 $3,274,312 $19,653,098 2008-2009 $6,432,992 $3,746,526 $23,515,505 2009-2010 $6,598,605 $3,854,025 $23,136,465 2010-2011 $6,436,601 $4,698,204 $22,687,704         difference $2,535,872 $1,877,895 $9,544,247 since 00-01: 65.0% 66.6% 72.6%

 

 

The new boss at the U.S. Department of the Interior has established a new rule for hydraulic fracturing (commonly called “fracking”) on federal lands that seems to have pleased neither environmentalists nor oil and gas producers.

According to the Associated Press, new Interior secretary Sally Jewell and the Obama administration announced Thursday (May 16) that companies that drill for oil and natural gas on federal lands will be required to disclose publicly the chemicals used in fracking operations.

Not surprisingly, oil and gas producers complained about the ruling, saying it’s unnecessary.

But at least one environmental group complained too, saying the decision is a watered-down version of an earlier proposal.

“It is clear what happened: the Bureau of Land Management caved to the wealthy and powerful oil and gas industry and left the public to fend for itself,” Jessica Ennis, a spokeswoman for the environmental group Earthjustice told AP.

A big reason for the complaint from environmentalists hinges on the ruling calling for disclosure of chemicals to go to a group called FracFocus, a voluntary site where companies self-report.

Critics say FracFocus allows companies to avoid disclosure by declaring certain chemicals trade secrets and point to a report by Harvard Law School last month that asserted the site is plagued by loopholes.

An official with Interior said if problems arise with FracFocus the federal government will make changes.

Jewell called the ruling a “common-sense update” that increases safety, adding, “As we continue to offer millions of acres of America’s public lands for oil and gas development, it is important that the public has full confidence that the right safety and environmental protections are in place.”

According to the Interior Department, domestic production from more than 92,000 oil and gas wells on public lands accounts for about 13 percent of the nation’s natural gas production and 5 percent of U.S. oil production.

In an Interior report last year, oil and gas activity on BLM-managed lands in New Mexico was linked to 47,807 direct jobs and $10.9 billion in direct output.

Click here to read the entire AP story.

A sobering report came from the Legislative Finance Committee at the Roundhouse on Tuesday (Mary 15), citing figures that will put more strain on the state’s health care system.

Among the findings?

*Some 62 percent of adults in New Mexico were overweight or obese in 2009, and

*New Mexico’s percentage of its population over the age of 60 is already higher than the national average and will get higher in the next 17 years. By 2030 one-third of the state’s population will be aged 60 or higher. Here’s the graphic:

For years, New Mexico has had a shortage of doctors, dentists and nurses and with an aging and increasingly overweight population — not to mention the uncertainty of the Affordable Care Act, (“Obamacare”) which kicks in next year — “the state can expect even greater healthcare access problems,” the LFC report said.

That means longer wait times.

The report calls for “a more coordinated approach to healthcare service delivery.”

Here’s the link to the report:

http://www.nmlegis.gov/lcs/lfc/lfcdocs/perfaudit/Department%20of%20Health%20and%20Allied%20Agencies%20%E2%80%93%20Adequacy%20of%20New%20Mexico%E2%80%99s%20Healthcare%20Systems%20Workforce.pdf

It’s not just a pipe dream: Japan is interested in acquiring natural gas from New Mexico.

But whether it will ever get across the Pacific Ocean is an open question.

An executive for Japan’s state-run energy corporation has been touring of New Mexico natural gas facilities this week and met on Monday (May 13) with Lt. Governor John Sanchez to discuss establishing a trade agreement between the U.S. and Japan that would include acquiring natural gas from New Mexico.

LET’S MAKE A DEAL: Japanese energy executive Hidehiro Muramatsu (left) talks to Lt. Governor John Sanchez about a proposed trade deal that would send New Mexico natural gas to Japan. New Mexico Watchdog photo.

“We are searching for liquefied natural gas,” Hidehiro Muramatsu of the Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation told New Mexico Watchdog during a reception with oil and gas executives. “In my opinion, it’s a pragmatic and practical way to transport natural gas from the state of New Mexico.”

As first reported by New Mexico Watchdog, Japan is actively searching for less expensive energy sources and considers New Mexico’s rich supplies of natural gas as a potential solution.

In the wake of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, Japan has virtually shut down its nuclear facilities. Muramatsu said only two of the country’s 49 reactors have restarted and Japan has shifted to natural gas to satisfy its energy needs.

But the price of natural gas in Japan is four times more expensive than natural gas in North America.

That’s why Japanese officials want to invest billions to ship gas overseas and are looking at the United States, Canada and Mexico as potential trade partners to supply an estimated 400,000 tons of natural gas per year.

New Mexico’s San Juan Basin and the Permian Basin have plenty of natural gas and low prices in the U.S. in recent years have soured the economies in the regions. A boost in production could be a game-changer.

“It’s a win-win situation,” James Manatt Jr. of Thrust Energy in Roswell said. “Japan needs natural gas and New Mexico has it.”

An increase in natural gas production wouldn’t just help the state’s energy companies but would translate into a boon for New Mexico’s state government revenues.

Taxes on oil and gas revenues make up a big chunk of the state’s general fund and New Mexico gets more bang for its energy buck from natural gas. It’s estimated that a $1 increase in the price per barrel of oil translates into about $4 million to the state’s general fund but a 10-cent increase in the price per thousand cubic feet of natural gas translates into $10 million extra into New Mexico’s coffers.

“This deal has the potential to increase New Mexico’s economic base,” Sanchez said. “Let’s look for new markets.”

But there are obstacles, both logistical and political.

LNG TANKER: In order to ship natural gas overseas, it has to be liquefied and then transported by tanker ship. Courtesy JapanFocus.

First, in order to ship natural gas overseas, it has to liquefied and while there are facilities in Texas and Louisiana that do that, a facility on the West Coast is preferable.

But getting an LNG facility built in California is an iffy proposition.

“It’s very difficult to construct a new factory in the state of California,” said Muramatsu. “The environmental regulations are very stringent.”

“There’s not a lot of delivery infrastructure in Washington (state) or Oregon compared to California,” Manatt said. “So will California stand in the way? Can California stand in the way? Will the Obama administration — and I’m not making a political statement — but will they say to California, this is the for the benefit of all the American people, New Mexico included, and we’re going to allow for the development of an LNG export facility on federal lands on the west coast of California?”

The U.S. has competition for the lucrative Japanese natural gas market.

Canada is considering constructing an LNG facility on the coast of British Columbia. Last month, Japanese officials took part in an energy forum with Canadian producers and political leaders.

Japan is also in discussions with the Mexican government.

“There are a number of potential LNG terminals in Mexico,” said Manatt.

Second, a potential U.S. natural gas deal with Japan would entail getting the federal government to approve a free trade agreement with Japan.

And a number of U.S. corporations such as Dow Chemical are opposed to a natural gas deal because it would drive up domestic natural gas prices. Critics say Dow and the other companies want to block a potential deal because, as big consumers of natural gas, their costs will go up.

Then there are environmentalists, who are opposed to increasing natural gas production in the U.S. because more production means more hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”), which they say could endanger ground water.

“We are so against this,” Eleanor Bravo of Food and Water Watch – New Mexico said last month. “This will mean more fracking — you can’t get around it … Shipping this stuff across the ocean increases our carbon footprint … and it delays our instituting of renewables.”

But both of New Mexico’s members in the U.S. Senate – Tom Udall and Martin Heinrich – who have strong ties with environmental groups — have told New Mexico Watchdog they approve of a natural gas deal with Japan.

“I think it’s good for New Mexico,” Sen. Udall said last week from his Washington D.C. office.

Muramatsu says he estimates that Japan will start importing natural gas from North America by 2017.

Which country will win the race for Japan is the billion-dollar question.

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and reach him on Twitter at @nmwatchdog

MINERAL ROYALTIES CONTROVERSY: New Mexico congressman Ben Ray Lujan has joined the fight against the Obama administration’s decision to cut state mineral and energy royalties.

First, it was the administration of Republican Gov. Susana Martinez.

Then, it was Democratic U.S. Sen. Tom Udall.

Now, Democratic U.S. House of Representatives member Ben Ray Luján is complaining about the Obama administration’s 5.1 percent reduction for states who get mineral and energy royalties from the federal government.

On Tuesday (May 14), Rep. Luján joined other members of the House by introducing legislation that would prevent the U.S. Department of the Interior from cuts the admnistration says it’s forced to make because of the budget sequester on Capitol Hill.

“The state’s share of these funds is just that – the state’s share – and should not be withheld by the federal government due to sequestration,” Luján said in a statement of the States Mineral Protection Act, which is also sponsored by a number of western representatives that include Republicans, and also calls for eliminating a 2 percent fee that the federal government charges for collection of the royalties.

The House bill is a companion to a Senate version that Udall and two Wyoming Republican senators have introduced.

The Obama administration — working through the Department of the Interior — has imposed the cuts to states that derive royalties from mineral and energy development that occur on federally-leased state lands.

“The sequester is a failed experiment – one that I have been opposed to every step of the way – that is harming New Mexico and should be repealed in full,” Luján said.  “But absent a comprehensive solution, Congress should stand up to protect funds that belong to the states and play a vital role in our communities.”

In 2012, New Mexico received about $488 million in mineral and energy extraction royalties from the Mineral Leasing Act and the 5 percent cut translates into a $26 million hit for the state, second only to Wyoming, which is losing $53 million.

The cuts were announced in late March, which prompted howls from a number of governors in western states, including Gov. Martinez who told New Mexico Watchdog on April 5 that her administration is looking into filing a lawsuit to fight the reductions.

Is this a preview of the advertising battle we’ll see in the 2014 governor’s race?

The New Mexico Republican Party has released a YouTube video attacking state Sen. Tim Keller, describing him as “ breathtakingly and shockingly radical.”

Sen. Keller, who has been mulling a possible run to challenge Republican Gov. Susana Martinez, wasn’t aware that the video had been posted until contacted Monday afternoon (May 13) by New Mexico Watchdog.

“I’ve got a long track record of bi-partisan accomplishments and working with people on the other side of the aisle,” said Keller, who has been known as a legislator who often involves himself in fiscal issues and holds an MBA from the Harvard Business School. “They must think pretty highly of me if they’re going to put this out.”

“We felt the people of New Mexico need to see what he’s actually saying in his statements,” state Republican Party spokesperson Jamie  Dickerman told New Mexico Watchdog. “When it’s convenient, he changes the message to fit the audience.”

The video is composed of a series of soundbites that Keller has made over the course of the last couple of years.

In the past legislative session, Keller was selected by his party colleagues in the Legislature as Senate Democratic whip and last month, Keller addressed state Democrats at its annual central committee and said that Gov. Martinez “is nothing but talking points and empty rhetoric.”

Keller has not officially announced whether he’ll run for governor. Attorney General Gary King and state Sen. Linda Lopez of Albuquerque have said they’ll throw their hats into the ring and Sens. Howie Morales and Joseph Cervantes have reportedly been weighing their options.

Keller told New Mexico Watchdog he’s also contemplating a run for state auditor. Keller says he expects to make an announcement about his statewide plans by the end of this month.

Here’s the Keller video:

“HARASSMENT”: The president of the Albuquerque Tea Party says the Internal Revenue Service has been asking intrusive questions and holding up its tax-exempt status.

News over the weekend that the Internal Revenue Service admitted targeting tea party groups and other conservative organizations across the country wasn’t shocking to the leader of the Albuquerque Tea Party.

They’ve been a target since 2009, Albuquerque Tea Party President RiIck Harbaugh told New Mexico Watchdog on Monday.

“I’d call it harassment,” Harbaugh said. “They’re trying to keep us from stepping even one inch over the line. We are always hesitating to express our viewpoints and have the IRS jump down our throats. Most other 501(c)4′s don’t face this constant threat.”

Under IRS rules, an organization with a 501(c)4 designation is classified as a nonprofit that is allowed a tax exemption for providing “social welfare.” A number of political groups of all stripes fall into this category. But in recent days, the IRS confirmed what many tea party organizations had been complaining about — conservative groups had been singled out.

Lois Lerner, the director the IRS unit that oversees tax-exempt organizations, confirmed Friday that organizations had been given additional scrutiny if their applications included the words “tea party” or “patriot.”

The admission caused a political furor that had even political rivals of the tea party fuming.

“This is outrageous,” said Democratic consultant Chris Kofinis told the National Journal, adding, “This is not a right-left issue.”

Harbaugh said the Albuquerque Tea Party filed for a 501(c)4 designation back in 2009 and in early December 2011 received a three-page letter from the IRS asking for additional documentation, including “all our correspondence, information on our membership, everything you could imagine,” Harbaugh said.

“It took us six weeks and hundreds of hours of work to accumulate the information,” Harbaugh said. “A lot of the information we couldn’t give them. They wanted to know whether members of the families of people in our group were politically active. How would we know that?”

UNDER FIRE: The Internal Revenue Service admits it has targeted Tea Party and conservative political groups for scrutiny.

Thinking the information the IRS wanted went too far, the Albuquerque Tea Party in early 2012 joined 26 other conservative groups across the country in getting legal representation from the American Center for Law and Justice, charging the IRS was violating the First Amendment and calling for information outside its scope of legitimate inquiry.

The legal team has been demanding the IRS resolve the matter as quickly as possible but the Albuquerque Tea Party is still not registered as a 501(c)4.

Correction 5/16: The original version of this story reported that a lawsuit had been filed on behalf of the Albuquerque Tea Party and the 26 other conservative groups. Harbaugh says that the groups are considering filing a lawsuit but have not done so yet.

“Yes, I feel I have someone looking over our shoulders every minute,” Harbaugh said.

In her conference call with reporters last Friday, Lerner said the IRS scrutiny was “absolutely inappropriate” but insisted IRS officials “didn’t do it because of any political bias.”

But on Monday, a draft IRS inspector general report obtained by ABC News showed that the targeting of conservatives started earlier than Lerner indicated and was more extensive than acknowledged.

The report indicates the IRS began focusing on “Tea Party or similar organizations” in March 2010. During this first phase, 10 tea party cases were identified. By April 2010, 18 tea party organizations were targeted, including three that had been approved for tax-exempt status.

By June 2011, the unit had flagged more than 100 tea party-related applications and the criteria used to scrutinize organizations had grown considerably, flagging not just “tea party” or “patriot” in group names, but also groups that were working on issues like “government debt,” “taxes” and even organizations making statements that “criticize how the country is being run” and education of the public by advocacy/lobbying to “make America a better place to live.”

President Obama talked to reporters on Monday about the allegations.

“If in fact IRS personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that’s outrageous. And there’s no place for it,” Obama told reporters.

“And they have to be held fully accountable. Because the IRS, as an independent agency, requires absolute integrity, and people have to have confidence that they’re … applying the laws in a nonpartisan way.”

But Harbaugh isn’t buying it.

“It makes no sense why this wasn’t stopped two years ago,” Harbaugh said. “When they’re targeting organizations like the tea party, patriot groups and 9/12 groups (associated with radio talk show host Glenn Beck) in applications and you tell me that’s not political? You tell me that’s not partisan?”

New Mexico Watchdog left messages with the leadership of a number of other New Mexico tea party organizations to see if they had any contact with the IRS. Thus far, we’ve had no response.

Harbaugh said the roughly 20 other New Mexico tea party chapters are meeting in Albuquerque on June 29 for a statewide conference in which the IRS controversy will be a primary topic.

Update: Bruce Higgins of the 9/12 Project of San Juan County said his organization also wrangled with the IRS in its attempt to receive 501(c)4 status.

Higgins said the IRS eventually granted the group non-profit status but that the process took three and a half years.

“I wouldn’t say we were harassed,” Higgins said but went on to say the IRS flooded the group with paperwork and gave them messages and sent letters that were often contradictory.

Higgins described the process as “a joke. It really is … It was typical, big, stupid government.”

Update 5/14: The chairman of the Republican Party of New Mexico released a statement Tuesday morning, calling for a congressional investigation. “This is unacceptable, and to see it affecting conservative groups across our nation—and especially in our home state—is infuriating,” John Billingsley said in part. “I am concerned with the severity of this infringement, as all Americans should be concerned. If this type of targeting witch hunt can be used against the Tea Party, it can be used against multiple entities and groups. This issue absolutely must be resolved.”

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and follow him on Twitter @robnikolewski

 

CARROT AND STICK: An executive order now requires all entities receiving capital outlay dollars from the Legislature to have their annual audits completed. Courtesy photo of New Mexico Capitol.

Government entities be warned: Fail to submit an audit to the state and say good-bye to some of that state money you want.

In Part 1 of our investigation into agencies, school districts, communities and other entities that haven’t turned in proper audits of taxpayer dollars they’ve received or spent, New Mexico Watchdog focused on the alarming number that have skipped their annual audits.

Just this year, of more than 500 entities who are legally obligated to turn in their paperwork to the State Auditors Office, some 59 have not, including cities as large as Gallup and Española.

Now in Part 2, Watchdog looks into a new plan designed to get delinquent organizations get in line:

Earlier this month, Gov. Susana Martinez issued an executive order mandating that if any governmental entity isn’t up to date on its audits, it won’t get any capital outlay goodies from the state, effective immediately.

“When you receive millions of dollars of taxpayer money, it’s the responsibility of the state to establish basic financial controls and require audits that demonstrate an entity’s ability to be a good steward of that money,” Gov. Martinez said in a statement.

“It’s a very important step that the governor ordered an executive order to say, ‘I’m no longer going to allow DFA (the Department of Finance and Administration) to just openly reward with capital outlay entities that haven’t submitted their audit,” State Auditor Hector Balderas told New Mexico Watchdog.

Balderas may be a Democrat and Martinez may be a Republican but they’re both on the same page when it comes to getting entities to adhere to the state’s 1978 Audit Act to help make sure money isn’t getting wasted or stolen.

“I think it sends a message to people who are in charge of these operations that they need to take more responsibility or else they aren’t going to be rewarded,” Balderas said.

New Mexico Watchdog has obtained a list from the DFA, which has cross-referenced the capital outlay projects approved in this past legislative session with entities that haven’t turned in their required audits. The result?

Some 35 organizations that will not receive money the Legislature and the governor’s office initially OK’d for them until they get their finances straightened out.

Included on the list:

*$400,000 for Española ($300,000 to remodel city hall and the jail and $100,000 in improvements to the Veteran’s Memorial Wall)

*$300,000 for streets and drainage improvements in Sunland Park

*$220,000 for gas pipelines to the general hospital in Roosevelt County

*$200,000 in improvements to the water system in the town of Cuba

*$155,000 for activity buses for the Las Vegas, New Mexico, city public school district

*More than $145,000 to help seniors in Gallup

*$40,000 for an ambulance for the town of Santa Rosa

The State Auditor’s Office has been battling late audits for years with a staff of 30 and a budget of $3 million to enforce what Balderas calls “a culture of a lack of accountability.”

There may be 59 entities out of compliance now but Balderas says in recent years the number has been as high as 90, with an estimated $1 billion in money not properly accounted for.

Without timely audits, the possibility of embezzlement or financial mischief almost always follows.

Recent scandals in Sunland Park, the New Mexico Finance Authority and the Jemez Mountain Schools each were accompanied by overdue audits.

“I’m like the truancy officer telling the parents about the bad grades and missed days,” Balderas said. “But the juvenile delinquent is still missing school and the fact that the kid is not in school probably indicates there are other problems that haven’t even been discovered yet.”

Now that the executive order has been issued, DFA — the agency that ultimately cuts the checks to entities receiving capital outlay — hopes the scofflaws will get back in compliance.

“This is going to give them more incentives to get those (audits) done,” said Ryan Gleason, the department’s Local Government Division Director, adding that overdue audits will be looked at carefully once they come in.

“Just because they’ve got their audit done, we want to make sure they’ve got good financial controls in place as well,” Gleason said. “Yes, we take this executive order very seriously … We have high hopes that this will help a number of communities to get into compliance.”

Balderas wanted to emphasize that many entities have leaders who are making an effort to get their financial houses in order but adds that “even when they’re not trying to play fast and loose and they’re just trying to do the right thing, I think they’re very at risk for some employee to steal them blind.”

In the meantime, here’s the list from DFA of capital outlay projects that are in jeopardy until the entities with missing audits get their paperwork completed:

(NOTE: Since the list was compiled, Roswell has turned in its audit and is expected to receive its capital outlay dollars.)

At Risk List SB 60 FY14 from New Mexico Dept of Finance and Administration by Rob Nikolewski

 

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and follow him on Twitter @robnikolewski

CHALLENGING THE FEDS: New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall is getting support for legislation to reverse 5 percent cuts in mineral and energy royalties.

Gov. Susana Martinez has voiced her support for Sen. Tom Udall, who has introduced legislation challenging the Obama administration’s decision to use sequestration to seize 5 percent of mineral and energy royalties from states..

“The federal government should never have cut these royalty payments to begin with, as they don’t represent the traditional type of programmatic cuts that the sequester was seemingly designed to enforce,” Martinez spokesman Enrique Knell wrote in an e-mail to New Mexico Watchdog.

In late March, the Obama administration through the Department of the Interior contacted 35 states that have federal leases on state lands, informing them that due to sequestration 5 percent of their royalties from mineral and energy extraction (such as coal, oil and natural gas) would be forfeited.

The two states hardest hit are Wyoming (which will lose $53 million) and New Mexico (which would lose $26 million).

Early next week, Sen. Udall — along with Wyoming senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso —will introduce the State Mineral Revenue Protection Act to try to reverse the decision.

“The agreement for mineral development needs to be honored,” Udall said by phone Thursday (May 9) from his Capitol Hill office. “These aren’t federal funds. These revenues should not be subject to sequestration.”

Gov. Martinez and officials in her administration have also complained and late Thursday afternoon, her spokesman said she “fully supports” Udall’s bill, adding she also “supports blocking the 2 percent federal collection fee, which costs New Mexico nearly $10 million for a service that costs the federal government a fraction of that.”

Udall says he hopes his bill will get assigned to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, where New Mexico’s other senator — Democrat Martin Heinrich — serves.

In an e-mail to New Mexico Watchdog, Heinrich wrote, “I disagree with DOI’s decision to sequester revenue under the Mineral Leasing Act and am pursuing an approach to fixing the problem that may not require legislation.”

Heinrich didn’t elaborate on what kind of solution he has in mind.

In 2012, New Mexico received about $488 million in mineral and energy extraction royalties from the Mineral Leasing Act.

FIGHTING BACK: New Mexico Sen. Tom Udall has put himself in opposition to the Obama administration when it comes to its decision to seize mineral and energy dollars from states.

Sen. Tom Udall has been a loyal supporter of President Obama, but the New Mexico Democrat is at odds over a move to take $26 million from the state in mineral and energy royalties and now he’s taking his case to the Senate itself.

Udall on Thursday (May 9) will introduce the State Mineral Revenue Protection Act, which would prohibit the federal government from seizing royalties as part of sequestration cuts, New Mexico Watchdog has learned. Update 1:15 p.m.: Udall’s office said the Senate is done with its work for the week so the bill is expected to be formally introduced early next week.

“The agreement for mineral development needs to be honored,” Udall said by phone from his Capitol Hill office. “These aren’t federal funds. These revenues should not be subject to sequestration.”

In late March, working through the U.S. Department of the Interior, the administration cut mineral and energy payments to 35 states by 5 percent. New Mexico stands to lose nearly $26 million— second only to Wyoming, which could lose $53 million for mineral and energy rights on state lands with federal leases.

Administration officials have insisted they’ve been forced to make the cuts, as the Budget Control Act calls for mandated reductions in spending.

“Every department (in the federal government) is subjected to that,” Interior spokeswoman Jessica Kershaw told New Mexico Watchdog in March. “There’s no real flexibility.”

Udall disagrees.

“These dollars should be off-limits to federal meddling,” Udall said. “I don’t think they should be allowed to use sequestration for this. These are state dollars.”

Earlier this week, Udall addressed the secretary of the Interior, Sally Jewell, during a Capitol Hill hearing, saying, “I hope it will get a fresh look from you.”

Joining Udall as co-sponsors are Wyoming senators Mike Enzi and John Barrasso, both Republicans. Udall said Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., may also get on board.

“We’ve got good bi-partisan support,” Udall said. “That’s how you get things done around here.”

Udall is usually in sync with Obama’s policy goals, but this legislation challenges the administration.

“We just have a disagreement on this one,” Udall said. “They have to implement the sequestration law. I don’t think they’re carrying it out properly.”

The bill will be formally introduced Thursday. Udall hopes it will get sent to the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, on which New Mexico’s other senator — Democrat Martin Heinrich — serves.

New Mexico was informed of the mineral and energy sequestration cuts in a letter to the state’s Taxation and Revenue Department on March 22 ,and the Department of Finance and Administration has been grappling with — and complaining about — the reductions, which start with a $5.2 million hit the feds want by July.

“It hasn’t been a transparent process,” DFA Secretary Tom Clifford said at the time. “We need to have a discussion with them about how important these revenues are to states like New Mexico.”

***

Here’s video of Udall questioning the new secretary at Interior at the Interior Appropriations Subcommittee. The mineral royalties/sequestration issue comes up about the three-minute mark:

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and follow him on Twitter @robnikolewski

THE DIRTY 59: The New Mexico auditor’s office reports that 59 entities in the state that spend or receive taxpayer money are behind on filing their audits.

By law, every organization in New Mexico that receives or spends public funds has to turn in an audit each year.

“If a government is going to spend taxpayer money they should be able to account and submit a full accounting of those activities every year,” State Auditor Hector Balderas said. “It’s a fundamental check and balance the taxpayer deserves.”

But a list compiled by the State Auditor’s Office and a review by New Mexico Watchdog show a staggering number are behind on their audits — and some of them haven’t turned one in for years.

“It’s a big deal,” Balderas said.

According to the State Auditor, there are 59 entities labeled as “at risk” because they are behind schedule for turning in their annual audits.

Some of the entities are small — such as the village of Maxwell, a ranching community up in Colfax County with a population of just 247. The public officials there haven’t filed an audit since Fiscal Year 2007 — some six years ago.

But some of them are large — such as the city of Española, that has a population well over 10,000. The city government hasn’t filed a completed audit since FY2009.

Then there’s Gallup, a city of more than 21,000 with a general fund of about $30 million, that hasn’t turned in an audit since FY2011.

The list includes 30 municipalities, five state agencies and three counties that have gone at least one year without filing a audit of what they’ve done with the taxpayer money they’ve spent or received.

Why haven’t they turned in their audits?

We’d like to know but phone calls from New Mexico Watchdog to the financial officials and political leaders in Española, Gallup and Sunland Park (non-compliant for the last two years) went unreturned.

Balderas says his office gets a lot of excuses, chief among them: entities say they can’t find an independent auditor to go through their records or they complain about the cost involved. Balderas says “some of those complaints are valid” and his office tries to work with the entities that are behind schedule, similar to the way a bank or a credit agency works with a customer who falls behind on their payments.

But there could be other issues at work.

“There is a culture of a lack of accountability,” Balderas said. “They really think I’m bugging them” when his office contacts the scofflaws.

Some years, as many as 90 entities receiving or spending taxpayer dollars have not filed their required audits — which, Balderas estimates, comes to about $1 billion.

There have also been cases where entities avoided turning in audits to hide embezzlement.

In 2009, a scandal broke out in the Jemez Mountains Schools where more than $3.3 million was stolen. The school district had been two years behind on its audits.

“I want to be very clear,” Balderas said. “At a lot of these governments, you have very well-intentioned political leaders at the helm. But sometimes they’re not trained in their responsibilities … I had very well-intentioned leaders in the Jemez Mountain case who didn’t even know how to read a financial statement or a budget.”

But the law is the law and any organization that receives New Mexico taxpayer dollars must account for its finances — just as every taxpayer has to turn in an income tax return to the Internal Revenue Service and the state.

Balderas said there are instances “where criminally speaking, public officials have purposely either lied to auditors, delayed the audit process, purposely impeded in hiring an auditor specifically for the purpose of not being discovered.”

Update: The Rio San Jose Flood Control District near Grants has the longest streak: It hasn’t filed a report with the State Auditors Office since FY2004.

In an e-mail to New Mexico Watchdog, Cynthia Spidle of the RSJFCD wrote:

“The Rio San Jose Flood Control District is not unwilling to have an audit done on its finances. The last time we had an audit, we had no major findings according to the OSA. The auditor that we hired had to wait nine months to receive his final payment, which can be hard on a small audit firm. We send out RFPs every year, to auditors on the OSA’s list. We are lucky if we get one response back. Usually the firm wants a lot of money for a very small audit, due to regulations from the OSA’s Office. At present we are waiting for a reply from the State Auditor’s Office on the auditor that we have recommended to complete the audits.”

***

In Part 2 of our investigation we’ll take a look at what can be done to get the scofflaws to turn in their audits.

Here’s the list of the 59 entities that are late:

 

At Risk Agencies in New Mexico — State Auditors Office April 15 2013

Adam Kokesh

People who follow New Mexico politics remember Adam Kokesh as a 2010 Republican candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives from Santa Fe, who ran a slightly off-beat campaign highlighting his libertarian ideals before losing in the primary to Tom Mullins of Farmington.

Kokesh has always had a lot of provocateur in him — and since he left New Mexico and moved to the Washington D.C. area he’s been pushing the edge and getting farther out on the fringe by taking part in a number of protests and saying controversial things.

Last year he alienated the Ron Paul campaign to such a degree that it called him “a deeply troubled individual.”

Now Kokesh is organizing a demonstration that’s generating headlines across the country:

A pro-gun march on the Fourth of July in which protesters will go from Arlington National Cemetery to Washington D.C. while carrying loaded rifles as an act of civil disobedience against the District of Columbia, which has strong gun control laws on its books.

Billing it as the “Open Carry March on Washington,” Kokesh is promoting the event on his Facebook page:

This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded & slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated & cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government & to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, & returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.

Saying he’ll go through with the march if he can bring in 10,000 demonstrators, Kokesh has already generated plenty of media attention (exactly what he wanted) from liberal websites and blogs such as Huffington Post and Think Progress, which has generated plenty of outrage from their readers.

Kokesh appeared earlier this week on the radio show of conspiracy maven Alex Jones who has a mixed opinion about the demonstration, writing on his InfoWars website that “despite the fact that I question the sanity of this event — and I think it might easily be turned into a government-run false flag event to make gun owners look like psychos — I still have to hand it to Kokesh for having the balls to even attempt such a show of civil disobedience.”

Kokesh says 1,000 people have RSVP’d for the march.

CAUSING A STIR: Former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said of Republican Ted Cruz, “I don’t think he should be defined as a Hispanic.”

After creating a stir for remarks about Sen. Ted Cruz, former Gov. Bill Richardson has sent a letter to the Texas Republican, New Mexico Watchdog has learned, offering what Richardson says is a clarification and not an apology.

While appearing May 5 on ABC News for a web interview after his taking part in a roundtable discussion on the Sunday talk show “This Week,” Richardson — a former Democratic candidate for president — was asked about the first-year conservative.

““I’m not a fan,” Richardson said. “I know [Ted Cruz is] sort of the Republican latest flavor. He’s articulate. He seems to be charismatic, but I don’t like his politics. I think he introduces a measure of incivility in the political process. Insulting people is not the way to go. But I guess he’s a force in the Republican political system.”

Richardson was then asked if Cruz represents most Hispanics with his politics.

“No, no,” said Richardson. “He’s anti-immigration. Almost every Hispanic in the country wants to see immigration reform. No, I don’t think he should be defined as a Hispanic.”

After being contacted Monday by New Mexico Watchdog about the comments on ABC, a member of Richardson’s staff called back and explained that Richardson wanted to share the contents of a brief letter he had just composed to Cruz:

Dear Senator,

When I said wasn’t a fan, I meant no disrespect.

Secondly, like me, I think you should not be defined just as a Hispanic politician.

That’s what I meant.

This is a clarification and not an apology.

All the best,

Bill Richardson

A call to the offices of Sen. Cruz have gone unreturned. If we receive a comment, we’ll post it as soon as possible.

Richardson, whose mother was Mexican and whose father was a U.S. businessman based in Mexico who was of half-Anglo and half-Mexican descent, has been one of the most high-profile Hispanic Democrats in the country.

Cruz’s father is Cuban and his mother is Anglo-American.

Richardson made his remarks on Sunday morning and by Sunday night, the comment about Cruz as an Hispanic was picked up all over the internet.

“Cruz does not support the Democratic agenda; ergo, he is not Hispanic,” wrote the conservative blog, American Thinker. “In (Richardson’s) view, heritage means nothing; politics trumps genes … This is a special kind of bigotry that redefines heritage in order to score political points – as cynical and bigoted as any right winger who hates ‘wetbacks.’”

Update: “I’m very surprised that Ambassador Richardson made this comment — it is extremely insulting,” Republican Alfonso Aguilar, Executive Director of the Latino Partnership for Conservative Principles told NBC Latino. “Your views on immigration should not define if you’re Hispanic or not. We are not a monolithic community, and this is a typical way of thinking for those who believe in identity politics, and it is narrow-minded.”

Richardson served two terms as New Mexico’s governor. His popularity in the state faded dramatically during his second term amid allegations of cronyism and pay-to-play charges. Richardson has maintained he never approved or was part of any illegalities.

He now spends his time at his office in Santa Fe and makes speaking appearances and sits on a number of boards across the country.

Here’s YouTube video of Richardson’s comments:

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and reach him on Twitter at @nmwatchdog

Rob Nikolewski

Ah, sometimes covering politics in this state is almost too easy. The stories write themselves.

Just last week, at the Democratic Party Central Committee Meeting (a title that seems oddly Kremlinesque) in Las Cruces aspiring Albuquerque mayoral candidate Pete Dinelli, in a speech in front of party faithful, pronounced that Democrats who vote for Republicans were acting like “a bunch of pendejos.”

It was an odd choice of words for a candidate in what — at least officially — is a non-partisan race.

But more than that, it’s a word that is simply not used in a public forum, much less in a speech to delegates.

For the uninitiated, pendejo is slang in Spanish for a dumbass and it has a literal connotation that means “pubic hair.” Unlike other anodyne pejoratives like “jerk,” the word packs a punch.

Some apologists for Dinelli have said that pendejo isn’t such a bad word, saying that it simply means “stupid.”

This is naïve at best and disingenuous at the worst. To them, I would say, go down to Airport Road or to San Antonio, Texas — where I grew up — and chide someone as being a pendejo. After you’ve had a few teeth loosened, then try convince me it merely means “stupid.”

Dinelli defended his sentiment but later issued the requisite apology.

Former Albuquerque mayor and ardent Democrat Jim Baca was so dismayed that he blogged that Dinelli “pretty much torpedoed his own candidacy” with the remark.

“He certainly needed all the votes he could get and he just alienated anyone who wanted to shed partisanship in this race,” Baca wrote.

I don’t live in Albuquerque but  I think Dinelli still has a fighter’s chance against incumbent R.J. Berry, especially when you consider that those who bothered to turn out for a recent election in the state’s largest city passed a ballot measure requiring that mayoral candidates must now receive at least 50 percent of the vote to avoid a runoff — something that Democrats lusted after because it will make nominal Republicans like Berry clear an additional hurdle.

But it certainly won’t help him.

Yet while Albuquerque Republicans rubbed their hands in glee after Dinelli’s gaffe, their excitement was tempered by the fact that just a few days earlier a couple of their own stepped into it a fiasco of their own making.

While members of the Bernalillo County Commission were arguing over increasing the minimum wage from $7.50 an hour to $8.50 an hour, a number of proponents and critics of the ordinance came forward during the public comment to address commissioners.

In the audience was an opponent of the wage raise and — most important — the executive director of the Bernalillo County Republican Party, Steve Kush, who was posting his remarks about the proceedings on his personal online account.

After a woman made her case for increasing the wage, Kush posted on Facebook that she was a “radical bitch” and after noticing the “nice boots” that a young woman wore while making her plea for a higher minimum wage, a former executive director of the Bernalillo GOP responded online that “Maybe she used those shoes to walk Central,” referring to a major street in Albuquerque known for prostitution.

Not to be outdone, Kush responded by writing, “she’s hot enough to almost make me register democrat.”

By the next morning, Democrats and liberals were howling with that weird combination of outrage and delight that comes when the political opposition takes an AK-47 to its own foot and by afternoon Kush had been suspended indefinitely by the party, which sent out a news release apologizing for the remarks. “I absolutely crossed the line,” told me. “It was dumb; it was stupid.”

For a Republican Party that is trying to show it’s not hostile to women, the incident had a Todd Akin-like feel.

“It’s such an embarrassment for the party,” one Albuquerque Republican messaged me that night.

But what’s just as amazing is that this is 2013, not 1993, and that political operatives don’t understand that what goes on the internet stays on the internet. Forever. 

And it’s not just a Republican/Democrat thing or a New Mexico thing.

Don’t get us started on the self-deluded Anthony Weiner of New York, who launched a thousand bad puns and headlines after he posted a picture of himself in all his Weiner glory to at least one female college student.

Now he’s planning a return to politics, testing the waters for a run for the mayor of New York City. And the latest polls have him in second place.

Now how do you say pendejo in Yiddish?

 (This column originally ran in the May 5 edition of the Santa Fe New Mexican.)

PREPARE FOR THE LAWYERS: A ban on oil and gas drilling in a rural county in New Mexico figures to wind up in court. New Mexico Watchdog photo.

Now that commissioners in Mora County have approved the only county-wide ordinance in the nation specifically prohibiting all oil and gas drilling, prepare for lawyers on both sides to do battle.

Wally Drangmeister, spokesman for the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association, told New Mexico Watchdog his organization “can’t comment on filing a lawsuit” but that “many people in the industry and people who have leased land (in Mora County) are looking very closely at that.”

Meanwhile, the chairman of the county commission that passed the no-drilling ordinance told us Friday (May 3) that an out-of-state environmental group based is about to sign an agreement to defend the county’s decision in court.

Lawsuits “have always been on the table,” commissioner John Olivas told New Mexico Watchdog. “What we’re doing to prepare ourselves is signing with a legal firm to represent us.”

The firm is the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund, a non-profit based in Pennsylvania that last year helped draft language for opponents of hydraulic fracturing — commonly called “fracking” — in Las Vegas, New Mexico.

“At the next county commission meeting, we’ll sign a retainer with the firm,” said Olivas, who said the fee will be $1. Olivas also said Mora County — one of the poorest in the state — will establish a fund to help pay for the law firm’s travel and living expenses.

Last Monday (April 29), Mora County commissioner passed the ordinance on a 2-1 vote.

“The primary reason was water protection,” Olivas said. “The next one was the community vastly supported the decision.”

But in a state where gas and extractive industries accounted for $1.7 billion in severance taxes in fiscal year 2012 — with more than half of that total going to public schools and higher education in the state — Mora County’s decision has reverberated.

“If actions like these stand unchallenged, the area will never have oil and gas produced,” Drangmeister said. “It could be a very bad development for oil and gas and the entire state of New Mexico.”

Paul Gessing of the Albuquerque-based free-market think the Rio Grande Foundation, took to the internet and called the commissioners who voted for ordinance “Mora-ons.”

“The folks in Mora County send their kids to schools that are funded largely by oil and gas, heat their homes and watch TV by the power of gas and/or some other nasty fossil fuel, drive on roads that have a petroleum base, and generally benefit from the fact that society around them embraces fossil fuels and oil and gas exploitation,” Gessing wrote.

“The resource belongs to the state of New Mexico,” Olivas said, adding he wants to change the state and federal constitutions.

“I’d rather fight industry in court that clean up after them when they leave our community,” comparing the looming battle to David and Goliath. “I think it can lead to a domino effect,” Olivas said.

It’s estimated oil companies such as Shell have leases on some 100,000 acres in the eastern part of Mora County so when the expected lawsuits come, one of the chief arguments is expected to center on property rights.

“We need to create other jobs,” Olivas said. “First, sustainable agriculture, second, business development and third, eco-tourism to keep people on the land.”

“Every school district in New Mexico benefits from oil and gas,” Drangmeister said. “Every county benefits … I’m not a legal scholar but from an 8th-grade civics standpoint, (the ordinance) has assertions that are troubling and questionable.”

***

Click http://www.scribd.com/doc/139339332/Mora-County-Oil-and-Gas-Ordinance to read the 7-page ordinance.

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and reach him on Twitter at @nmwatchdog

David Coss, mayor of Santa Fe

A liberal politician in a liberal town, Santa Fe Mayor David Coss says he won’t seek another term for the office he’s held since 2006.

“There are other things that I’d really love to do with my family and friends that I can’t do as mayor,” Coss told radio station KVSF Thursday morning (May 2), although he didn’t rule out running for another elected position.

“This could be partially me clearing the path for another office,” he said. “But I’ll have to look at that.”

During his tenure, the former union official and state employee helped pass a minimum wage increase that rivals San Francisco as the highest in the nation (Santa Fe is currently at $10.51 an hour), supported declaring Santa Fe as a “sanctuary city” for immigrants in the country illegally and helped keep the College of Santa Fe (now known as the Santa Fe University of Art and Design) from closing.

Last year, Coss decided to remain mayor while running for state representative in the Legislature but lost in what was considered a big upset to Carl Trujillo in the Democratic Party primary.

With Coss stepping down in 2014, there are already rumors of possible replacements, including Javier Gonzales, former head of the Democratic Party of New Mexico.

Click here to listen to the KVSF interview.

Hat tip, Santa Fe Reporter.

GIDDY-UP: Draft legislation in Congress would put the organization that went after Lance Armstrong in charge of drug testing race horses.

New Mexico horse racing officials trying to clean up the sport aren’t ready to takes sides on a bill to grant the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency authority to oversee and enforce drug testing for thoroughbred and quarter-horse races across the country.

For now they’re watching and waiting.

U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico, is a co-sponsor.

“We’d like to review the bill in its entirety,” New Mexico Racing Commission Agency Director Vince Mares told New Mexico Watchdog. “Our focus will continue to be aggressive in our approach to cracking down on doping.”

Udall has joined two House Republicans to draft legislation for what they’re calling the Horseracing Integrity and Safety Act. The bills gives the USADA — rather than individual states or racing associations — broad authority to clean up the sport and enforce anti-doping standards in races with simulcast wagering.

“The chronic abuse of racehorses with painkillers and other drugs is dangerous and just plain wrong,” Udall said. “Racing groups have promised drug reform for decades, but this bill would bring in real standards and enforcement from an organization with a proven record for cleaning up sports.”

Thus far, horse racing officials across the country are divided on the bill.

The Jockey Club, the breed registry for thoroughbreds in North America, released a statement, saying, “We appreciate Congress’ continued interest,” but fell short of endorsing the bill. The Racing Commissioners International, which sets standards for racing regulations, released its own statement criticizing the proposed legislation.

The RCI questions whether USADA can handle the volume of drug tests that would be done nationally and questioned whether the federal government should grant the authority to USADA in the first place, claiming it may actually weaken standards.

“We appreciate the desire of those in Congress who wish to help us in our anti-doping efforts, but we think a better way might be to revisit the $9 million in federal aid received by the USADA each year to require that some be set aside to fund equine drug testing research projects,” RCI President Ed Martin said.

USADA is a non-governmental agency that oversees drug testing for the U.S. Olympic team and recently made headlines for its pursuit of Lance Armstrong, who earlier this year admitted he used performance-enhancing drugs during his cycling career.

But while USADA has worked with sports organizations in the past, pro sports leagues such as the NFL and the NBA have their own testing protocols.

For years, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has tried to pass legislation to provide federal regulation of pro boxing, without success.

Udall and the bill’s supporters say the funding would come from the horseracing industry — tracks, breeders, owners, etc. — and not from taxpayers.

The bill “has a very light federal touch,” Udall spokeswoman Marissa Padilla said Thursday. “The enforcement mechanism would go to USDA, which has a strong reputation … If you are without a strong statutory approach, people who are kicked out of one state are able to go to another state and race.”

Mares said the New Mexico Racing Commission will watch Udall’s bill as it wends its way through Capitol Hill. “We’ll review it,” Mares said, “and in the meantime, we as a commission will continue to be aggressive in identifying cheaters and getting them out of New Mexico.”

Contact Rob Nikolewski at rob@nmwatchdog.org and follow him on Twitter @robnikolewski

We had a chance to talk to Gov. Susana Martinez today (May 1) for a few minutes and, with the trusty Flip camera in tow, joined a couple other reporters for a quick interview.

New Mexico Watchdog asked her about what seems like the pending USDA approval of a horse slaughter facility in Roswell. Click here for that story.

We also asked her about being selected to TIME magazine’s list of the 100 most influential people:

And Martinez was asked about getting invited to the Washington D.C. residence of Vice President Joe Biden to take part in a Cinco de Mayo celebration. Biden’s a Democrat and Martinez is a Republican and the invitation comes a month after the governor and vice president travelled together to Vatican City as part of the U.S. delegation on hand for the installation of Pope Francis:

Martinez was in Albuquerque, where she announced she will form a new working group to identify deficiencies and loopholes in our current child abuse statutes so that they can be fixed in the next legislative session. The group will include law enforcement, Children Youth and Families Department officials, child advocacy groups, and experts in the field of child abuse and neglect: