Eye Poll: Readers Approve Taxpayer Financing

As you know we have serious problems with taxpayer financing. However, a majority of Eye On Albuquerque readers support taxpayer financing by a margin of 9%, with 53% supporting taxpayer financing, 44% do not support taxpayer financing, 1% don't know, 1% don't care. (Read the results of our unscientific poll here.)

We've had some good discussion regarding taxpayer financed elections. The original intent was to take money out of elections in an effort to make them "clean." We wish to thank Matt Brix from Common Cause for his thoughtful posts on the subject, even though we couldn't disagree more.

We've just begun our first foray into public financing and have already found some scary opportunities for abuse. In light of the Court House scandal, the $15,000 party financed by taxpayers through the Las Vegas School District, and the recent Housing Authority scandals, it's hard to believe we'll have to wait too long before this system of funding political ambition is exposed for what it really is.

Taxpayer financing is based upon the premise that people who run for office are good and noble; and some regardless of financing actually are. The trouble is we've already got enough elected officials feathering their nests without giving them the ability to pay off supporters who no longer can be linked to them through their financial support. The Albuquerque Open and Ethical Elections ordinance hasn't removed money from politics, it's simply hidden it.

There's nothing dirtier than forcing taxpayers to fund the political ambitions of candidates, while at the same time hiding the influences behind their campaign. We've already spotted the hand of the Almighty Marty pulling the strings of the de'Pascal campaign... who's really behind the other taxpayer financed campaigns? You can be sure that we'll be watching their expenditures very closely because there's really no other way to spot the man (or woman) behind the curtain.

This week the Eye Poll takes a look at embattled Councilor Don Harris. According to our Eyes the recall campaign has turned in over the 922 signatures required to force a recall in this year's municipal election. So unless a judge decides that the city clerk's (and our) interpretation of the city charter are in error, the people of district 9 will have the opportunity to be the first remove a city elected official. You have the opportunity to weigh in with your opinion in this week's Eye Poll.

Eye Poll: Pay Them

Last week's Eye Poll turned out to be somewhat of a surprise. The city council has been busy fighting with the mayor and has made some controversial moves lately like the 19th Century Street Car tax and the Councilor Protection Act. Even so, Eye On Albuquerque readers voted to give councilors a raise from approx $10,000 a year to almost $30,000 a year.

In our unscientific poll 46% voted to raise the compensation for councilors to 33% of the mayor's salary, 35% believed that the current compensation was adequate, 10% thought they were already paid too much, 6% believed they should receive more than $30,000 a year, and 3% didn't know. (See the full results here.)

We believe that despite our displeasure with a number of councilors, their job takes more effort than dropping in to city hall 3 Mondays a month to vote. It's really a full time job and compensation should reflect both the expectations of constituents and importance of the office.

This week we're taking a look at taxpayer financing of municipal elections. As you may have guessed the Albuquerque Open and Ethical Elections ordinance is one of our pet peeves. We think it's madness to give taxpayer money to candidates to run for office. In New Mexico we've already got a problem with elected officials feathering their own nests with taxpayer money; we don't need the unelected getting in on the act too.

This week it's your turn to tell us your opinion by voting in the Eye Poll. Don't forget to vote!