The Missing Piece of the Puzzle

How do you really get to know a candidate? One way is to go to a website (Rey Garduño, Paulette de'Pascall, Brad Winter, Debbie O'Malley). Now that you're back... how much do you really know about the candidates or the incumbents?

You could also go to candidate forums, read campaign literature, surf the net and read blogs like this one, follow them through the mainstream media, or perhaps you'll be lucky enough to meet one of the candidates on your very own doorstep. If you manage to check each of the above sources of information off your list... now how much do you really know?

Each of the above items is a piece of the puzzle. When combined, they can form a picture of a candidate or an elected official. However, there's still one important piece missing; one that cannot be spun, suited to individuals or situations, and although it's often tried, this piece can't be denied (even if you forget to hit the "finalize" button). The all important piece, the one that not only completes the puzzle but brings it into absolute focus is the one that shows who a candidate associates with.

In today's Tribune there's a story about a group called the Committee for Responsible Budgets who ran ads attacking Councilors Winter and Harris over the most recent council / mayoral spat that had to do with the budget and $9 MILLION for the Westside Metropolitan Detention Center. Turns out three of the group's backers can be tied directly to the Almighty Mayor himself.

That story and its implications can not be written about any of the 5 candidates taking taxpayer money to further their political ambitions; not because they're not backed by special interest, but because those interests can remain unknown. A giant piece of their ideological picture can remain missing. What do they really stand for? Are they really telling you the truth in their campaign literature or when they're standing on your doorstep?

Our Eyes tell us that Transit Director Greg Payne has been spending time with Paulette de'Pascal. Some say that the mayor himself recruited her to run against his council rival Brad Winter. If we had a contributor list to look at we could make comparisons. If her contributors are the same people that donated to the mayor, then we'd know a lot about how she'd vote if elected.

Rey Garduño, running for the District 6 seat vacated by Martin Heinrich... Besides using a taxpayer funded email and being an advocate for "clean" elections, what else does he stand for? And what special interest group (if any) has encouraged him to run?

The Albuquerque Open and UN-Ethical Elections ordinance has created a veil of secrecy that surrounds these candidates. Who do they associate with? What do they really believe? Frankly, a candidate that's freed from their associations can tell voters whatever the voters want to hear because there's no record of a contradiction based on association to compare their statements with.

Matt Brix from Common Cause is a frequent poster here on Eye On Albuquerque, particularly when we talk about taxpayer financing of elections. He's eloquent and makes good arguments for taxpayer financing. Further, we're going give him credit for genuinely wanting to make elections more accessible. However (you knew this was coming), his advocated system of "clean" elections doesn't take money out of politics, it takes money out of our pockets while allowing candidates to hide their true colors; both are fundamentally wrong.

Every piece of a candidate's picture is important. Who a candidate's supporters are is probably MORE important to judging a candidate and their character, than any other piece of the puzzle. We don't have a problem with contribution limits and we believe that contributions should be made public, but forcing a group of people to fund another's political ambition is wrong. Obfuscating their supporters and their true objectives is undeniably dangerous.

Eye Told You: Sour Apples

It seemed like the electrons hadn't dried on our last taxpayer financing of municipal elections post before the poster child for why we shouldn't use taxpayer money to fund elections went out and bought herself a $3,000 apple (hat tip: Joe Monahan). According to Paulette de'Pascal's most recent campaign expenditure report, the District 4 council candidate purchased a $2,990.26 computer from the Apple Store at ABQ Uptown.

According to Monahan, Ms. de'Pascal cleared the purchase with the city attorney's office. The fact is, like it or not the purchase of a computer even a $3,000 computer is allowed by the Albuquerque Open and UN-Ethical Elections ordinance.

8. Communication Systems Purchase or lease of computers, telephone systems and other related communication devices used in campaign activities.

- Albuquerque Open and Ethical Elections Ordinance

To our knowledge, the ordinance does not address the disposition of purchased items after their use in a campaign. Besides, who would want some of the crap produced by campaigns for unsuccessful candidates (or for successful ones for that matter)?

Meanwhile over at one of the other "clean" campaigns, Rey Garduño's defending his decision to use his UNM email for campaign purposes. First of all, it's clearly unethical and according to the Journal article (Subscription) campaigning using university supplies or equipment is not allowed by UNM. Get ready for Garduño's defense... he's not a university employee because he's retired.

That's got to be the dumbest excuse we've heard in a long time. Along with the other retirement benefits that he may be receiving he's receiving a free email account from the university. Since the University of New Mexico is a state institution, it receives large amounts of tax dollars. In fact, UNM depends on tax money to stay open. That email account is no different than a pencil, or paper, postage, our tax dollars purchased the computer that hosts it, pays for the salaries of the people who maintain it, and the connection to the Internet that allows Mr. Garduño to access it.

That's the simple reason that regular employees of cities, states, and state universities are not allowed to campaign using their computers or email accounts. Retired or not, it's clearly unethical even if it's not specifically disallowed. Not to mention, there are more than enough email providers like yahoo or gmail that would provide a FREE account. Plus, since the Albuquerque Open and UN-Ethical Elections ordinance has generously provided $25,902.50 for his campaign he could easily afford a paid email account.

There's more to this little taxpayer funded fiasco. According to Paulette de'Pascal's July 13th campaign expenditure report, in addition to the dubious and legal Apple purchase she gave $400 to the Democratic Party of New Mexico. We'd love to know exactly what type of "expense" she incurred, because it looks an awful lot like a donation to her party.

We would like to believe that the original framers of this "clean" elections bill didn't intend for it to be used to fund political parties. There's something fundamentally wrong and inherently dirty when taxpayer money is given directly to political parties, and we don't care if it's Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, or the Nudists for New Mexico party. (Ok... We made that last one up.)

Whether it's an email account, an apple computer, or a donation to the party, it's all taxpayer money being spent for political purposes. The only difference between Rey Garduño's email account and Paulette de'Pascal's Apple computer is that the university recognized that state employees should not be using taxpayer money for their own political ambitions. It's a lesson that we should re-learn here in Albuquerque.