We first visited the life and times of today's Photo Fun subject a number of years ago, but it is well worth another entry. . .

The history of New Mexico politics is populated with colorful characters who left indelible images. Surely, one of them was Ingram B. "Seven Foot" Pickett.

Here he is pictured in a campaign brochure as he successfully sought his second, six year term on the old State Corporation Commission (SCC) whose modern successor is the Public Regulation Commission (PRC).

Pickett served in the 1950's and proved to be one of the state's most popular politicos of the decade. It didn't hurt that upon taking office he removed the hinges to his office door as a symbol of transparency.

In 1956 Pickett challenged Gov. John Simms for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination. He narrowly lost but the challenge may have played a role in Simms' defeat to Republican Ed Mechem.

The late author and newspaperman Tony Hillerman wrote that Pickett was a driver for NM Governor Thomas Mabry when in 1950 he was put in the corporation commission race as a way to draw votes away from a challenger who was a threat to the governor's favored candidate, but Pickett proved so popular he beat them both.

His height was such a political plus that Pickett went to court to have his name legally changed to Ingram B. "Seven Foot" Pickett. Like a true politician, Pickett didn't let it bother him that he actually was one inch short of the seven foot mark.

Pickett's campaign slogan was "Big enough to serve you. Small enough to need you." That summed up his towering presence and populist appeal that earned him a chapter in the never ending book of La Politica.

This is the home of New Mexico politics.

E-mail your news and comments. (jmonahan@ix.netcom.com)

Interested in reaching New Mexico's most informed audience? Advertise here. 

(c)NM POLITICS WITH JOE MONAHAN 2019

Will the Governor and her majority Dems play into the hands of the R's and pass significant tax increases this legislative session? That's the question du jour as the 60 day session picks up pace. Here are the takeaways:

--Raising the gas tax by ten cents a gallon to finance road repairs as proposed by the D' is seen as a political loser. Taxpayers are already scratching their heads. You have a $1 billion surplus for the current budget year that ends June 30 and a projected $1.1. billion surplus for the one that starts July 1 and you want to raise taxes? Already?

--Speaker Egolf and the legislative leadership have already agreed to tap a bunch of that surplus for one time road repair projects, particularly for the hard hit roads in booming oil country.

--The problem with the tax package, which includes raising the income tax for the highest earners who now pay the same rate as low and middle income taxpayers, is timing, timing, timing.

--R's are already scoring points shouting out that when it comes to Dem tax hikes: "We told you so!" Rio Rancho GOP State Rep. Jason Harper effectively twisted the knife, saying, “It’s gonna hit our middle class, all these teachers they just gave a raise to, it’s going to hurt them.”

John Sanchez

Senator Tom Udall told the NM Legislature Tuesday that "in all my years of public service, I have never been so worried about our democracy." He was referencing the mess in DC, but he will soon get a personal sampling of direct democracy when, as expected, he launches his bid for a third Senate term in 2020.

In the turbulent Trump era there is little certainty about politics but one thing is sure--former Lt. Governor John Sanchez will not seek the GOP nomination to take on Democrat Udall next year.

But Sanchez told me over a coffee break recently at the Starbucks near the ABQ Indian Pueblo Cultural Center that doesn't mean his political career is over. Sanchez chastised those (including this blogger) for promoting his early obituary from state politics, declaring:

I am not running for the Senate in 2020 but I am going to remain active in politics and policy.

Sanchez, 56, would not be well-positioned for a statewide race so soon after the completion of the Martinez years which ended with her approval ratings in the cellar. Despite having a mind of his own and a strained relationship with Martinez, he would surely be saddled with her sour legacy, if he were to get back into the political fray so soon.

However, Sanchez, who built and now presides over a highly successful ABQ roofing business and who previously made a brief run for a GOP Senate nomination, says in politics time acts likes a salve over old wounds. In the future, he argues, Governor Martinez will probably be credited with running a sound fiscal policy from which the state ultimately benefited. Of course, if that panned out it would benefit Sanchez, if he were to seek higher office--say the governorship in four or eight years.

That would seem about the only office that would really appeal to the state's former #2. During his eight years he won kudos for his proficiency in presiding over the state senate and for his ability to build bipartisan bridges and avoid the worst instincts of Martinez.

There has been plenty of criticism of the ABQ City Council for supporting a ban on single use plastic bags as well as straws and styrofoam as the city continues to grapple with a multi-year crime wave. What about concentrating more on that, the council critics cry. But a number of readers, including Eric Olivas, defend the council proposal:

I own a landscaping company and I can tell you that the accumulation of plastic in our local environment is a real problem that our team sees everyday. Look nationwide and worldwide, and this is a full blown crisis. The council is showing some real leadership here by trying to tackle this issue. Moreover, the idea that the council hasn’t done anything about the crime crisis is absurd. 

As Councilor Ike Benton wrote on your blog recently, the council and administration have done more in one year than happened in the last 8. Should the council not consider any matters that are not crime related? It took 10 years to get in this mess, it is going to take more than a year to fix. I don't agree with everything this council has done but by and large this council seems to have woken up from an 8 year slumber and gotten to work.

It’s time to start being proactive and that is what this ordinance does. Limiting single use plastics is a worldwide trend. I’m sure the restaurants and retailers will complain about the “costs,” but what is the cost of continuing to spew plastic into the oceans and natural environment? I know it’s hard to worry about oceans here in the high desert, but maybe for once we can be on the right side of history here. . . 

More about the proposal from the city's website.

STILL THE CRIME

But the crime watchers are never far behind. And one of them came with this hit:

24 hours after the Mayor's "State of the City" address, which included slick, self-promotional videos from all nine City Councilors, this happens:

"Two men, best friends, were shot and killed while family members say they were visiting an assistant manager at a Northeast Albuquerque gas station early Monday morning, Jan. 14."

All is well. Remain calm. We've turned the corner on crime and are going to get those nasty plastic cups and straws!

As the crime wave continues attorney and former ABQ City Councilor Greg Payne has been a vocal critic of the City Council and Mayor. He gets some support from reader Keith Miller:

Greg Payne is saying the truth. Neither D nor R has, as their first area of interest, the commitment for doing the nut-crunching that is required. What seems to be missing however is the justifiable use of punishment when lawlessness is defined.  There is no wonder that those determined to use violence and break the law will continue to do so while they laugh at New Mexico’s rhetoric. Have a nice day…

Reader Art Tannenbaum, on the same subject, writes:

Joe, your writing on Albuquerque matters lately has been really good. Think about the extraordinarily increased levels of resources put into APD for years and years. You've got to ask: What has been bought here? Ever increasing chaos and mayhem? Recently you quoted a longtime City Councilor patting himself on the back regarding the tax increase the Council imposed on this poor city last year, the lion's share of which was allegedly dedicated to public safety. All this time many figured 2019 was supposed to be the year when the city political establishment finally fulfills its promises with respect to an acceptable level of fundamental pubic safety no matter what--not only is it a essential quality of life concern but it's also a matter of the taxpayer getting what's been paid for.

RETIRE HERE

On the subject of attracting more retirees to the state and a proposal to spend $1 million to advertise to them, reader Jim McClure writes:

I’m in favor of attracting more retirees to New Mexico but agree that we don’t need to earmark a million bucks to do so. Retirees are a good deal for the state because we spend money, use few services and won’t demand good schools. The downside is that retirees tend to be well-informed voters, and that could be a problem for some of our politicians. One group that merits more attention is military retirees. New Mexico is one of the few states that levy state income tax on military pensions. Eliminating this tax would make us a prime retirement destination. Many military retirees have experience as instructors, and fast-track certification could help reduce the teacher shortage.

Reader Wanda writes to say there's a dark side to retiring in NM:

I knew NM was considered to be a state suffering from deep dark poverty but I still chose Albuquerque as the place to move to after retiring. I now question the wisdom of that choice. I find so many things such as fees for plumbers, etc. to be much higher than I'm accustomed to. While in the parking lot at Smiths, an over the road truck driver walked by and said "can you believe the prices here? I drive all over the country and this state is the worst. Shopping here is like shopping at a convenience store the prices are so high!"  I love NM and that's the reason I returned here but when I look at my bank account I question that choice. . . 

COUNTING POVERTY

NM Voices for Children writes in a news release of the 2018 Kids Count Data Book:

The rate and number of children living in poverty markedly decreased from 2016 to 2017, which is good news for our state. However, with 27 percent of our children living at or below the federal poverty level, New Mexico still ranks poorly at 48th in the nation in child poverty. Rates are particularly high among young children (29 percent), Hispanic children (30 percent), and Native American children (42 percent). New Mexico’s child poverty rate has improved this year, but over the long-term nearly 12,000 more kids live in poverty now than did in 2008 – a 10 percent increase. While most other states have recovered from the recession, New Mexico’s economy (lags).

YES TO ELECTORAL COLLEGE

We blogged recently that eliminating the Electoral College and electing the president solely by the popular vote could freeze New Mexico out of the national political scene. That brought they response from Mitchell Freedman in Rio Rancho:

Joe, I think you make the wrong assumptions about keeping the Electoral College as is. First, do presidential candidates really spend time in NM? I have not seen evidence of that. Second, how does having Bush II and Trump, who gained office because of the way the Electoral College currently works, help NM? Presidents Gore and Hillary Clinton would have been far more sympathetic to the people and land of New Mexico. Third, we too often overemphasize the rural/urban divide and coastal/midwest divide. There are plenty of “red” state voters in California who do not get heard in a presidential race. There are plenty of “blue” state voters in Kansas and elsewhere who do not get heard in a presidential race. Third, presidential strategists and their candidates center on "battleground states.” They don’t go to Wyoming  and they won’t come to NM anymore. NM is part of the majority which voted for Hillary Clinton and will support the Democratic Party candidate in 2020.

From 2000 through 2008 New Mexico attracted a large number of visits by the presidential candidates, exposing them to the state's needs and causing them to spend considerably on advertising here. That is no longer the case since we lost our swing state status, but could that change in the decades ahead? It could. A good reason, we believe, to keep the Electoral College.

This is the home of New Mexico politics.

E-mail your news and comments. (jmonahan@ix.netcom.com)

Interested in reaching New Mexico's most informed audience? Advertise here. 

(c)NM POLITICS WITH JOE MONAHAN 2019

Is it time to pay our 112 legislators and keep them up in Santa Fe longer each year? In a mild surprise, it seems the number of New Mexicans believe so and their number is growing.

In a  Research and Polling survey conducted among 450 registered voters for Common Cause NM in December, it was found that. . .

Approximately two-thirds of voters (68%) say they either strongly support (41%) or somewhat support (27%) extending the length of the state legislative sessions to address the increase in the number of policy and budgetary issues. . . 

Two-thirds of voters also say they either strongly support (37%) or somewhat support (29%) paying state representatives and senators an annual salary equivalent to the average New Mexico household, so that they may focus more on issues in New Mexico rather than also trying to hold down a full-time job. In comparison, 24% of voters say they are opposed to the idea of paying state legislators an annual salary.

NM remains the only state that doesn't pay it lawmakers but they do receive a daily payment (per diem) of $161 for every legislative day they attend (in March it goes up to $184) as well as for each committee meeting they attend when the Legislature is not in session.

Paying the politicos and extending the legislative sessions would require voters to make the changes by voting for a constitutional amendment, which would have to be sent to them by the legislators. That's probably not going to happen in the 2020 cycle. And while the poll shows support for the measures, how would that support stand up against an intense negative campaign? Perhaps not as strong. GOP opposition against regular paychecks for the politicos has surfaced early in this session.

MARIJUANA MOOD


Voters (and legislators) have more pressing issues on their mind than longer sessions or regular paychecks. The CC poll also reported that only 36% of the respondents felt the state was going in the "right direction." And that was in the afterglow of the November election when Dems swept to victory. However, it does beat the meager 24% who felt we were headed in the right direction in last year's polling.
Another improbable item for this session is the legalization of recreational marijuana. We blogged of a perception that demand for that may be waning in light of skeptical articles like this one from the liberal New Yorker. But reader Peter Katel says not so:

Joe, I wouldn’t get too excited about that piece you cited from The New Yorker. The New York Times ran what amounted to a corrective to that article, and the book that was its source material, noting the shoddy statistical analysis and over-reliance on anecdotal evidence that characterize both. Note that the author, unlike Malcolm Gladwell and Alex Berenson of the New Yorker, is a physician. You may be correct that the Legislature won’t legalize cannabis. But your suggestion that this would reflect a change in national mood on the subject assumes way too much on the basis of far too little evidence - and questionable evidence at that.

This is the home of New Mexico politics.

E-mail your news and comments. (jmonahan@ix.netcom.com)

Interested in reaching New Mexico's most informed audience? Advertise here. 

(c)NM POLITICS WITH JOE MONAHAN 2019