When the Dianna Duran scandal made the headlines, I asked a different question.
What was she doing with all that money in the first place, I asked? How does the Secretary of State’s race generate hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions? Who is doing all that contributing, and what do those contributors want? Even though Duran has resigned, the question remains. Increasingly, this issue affects political races at every level.
According to the Secretary of State’s own web site, in 2014 candidate Dianna Duran received $356,208.08 in contributions and spent $359,073.20. What for?
I called Viki Harrison of Common Cause. She was so excited to talk about this, she practically jumped through the phone.
Harrison echoed my concern that big money has invaded New Mexico politics, and it’s causing a serious shift in the whole way we do our political business.
Harrison cited the 2012 state senate race between Tim Jennings and Cliff Pirtle as a turning point.
That was a game changer for New Mexico. Never before had we seen TV advertising for a local legislative race. In that race, candidates for one small legislative district were buying advertising that reached most of the state. Official filings showed Jennings raised almost $400,000 and spent more than that. Pirtle raised only about $78,000 (still a mind-boggling sum for a political unknown) but the real money was spent by independent PACs, reputedly linked to Gov. Susana Martinez. Where did all the money come from? And when the PACs drive the election, supposedly without any coordination with the candidate himself, how is the candidate supposed to react? Will the winner be grateful for all the help he or she had not asked for?
Not long ago, in another century, candidates for local office could run a campaign with a few thousand dollars, some volunteers and a lot of shoe leather. Knocking on doors over weekends and showing up at community events was the way to reach voters. No more.
Last month I received several urgent-sounding e-mails from public officials, urging me to donate to their campaign funds because an important deadline was looming and they had to raise specific amounts of money by that deadline. The next election is more than a year away. What’s the deadline?
It’s nothing but the date for filing a report with the Secretary of State’s office. It means nothing in terms of the candidate’s need to spend money. An administrative reporting deadline has become an excuse for creating artificial excitement. The e-mails speak of breathless anticipation – will he reach his goal?
This pressure to raise money is occuring in the midst of an orgy of political fund-raising at the national level. How many bridges could we repair, how many hungry children could we feed, with the money that will be spent for next year’s election?
And – because it is increasingly absurd for legislators to do year-round fundraising and then serve in the legislature as volunteers — it is pressuring New Mexico to move toward a salaried professional legislature. We may or may not want that, but the pressure to raise money should not be the deciding factor.
In this new era, citizens and the news media have to ask candidates new kinds of questions related to where their money came from and how they plan to continue to represent their constituents – not the special interests — in light of these new pressures.
And, until the rules change again – which may require a federal constitutional amendment to repeal the Citizens United court decision – we may have to donate more just to keep our officials working for us.
Triple Spaced Again, © New Mexico News Services 2015