Tuesday, April 03, 2007

Political Agendas

The Albuquerque Journal had a story today on people's comments about Manny Aragon. The people were all customers at the Barelas Coffee House. I go there often for the best Huevos Rancheros in this quadrant of the Universe.

One of the commenters said she was disappointed that tax dollars were going to 'political agendas' rather than important things like welfare or students. Am I missing something here? Or is the word political so tainted now that its real meaning is lost on most folks?

I for one hope this country has a strong political agenda in the next two years that centers on reform and removal from office of people like bush. We need a political agenda that strengthens our economy, has a fair tax program and some international common sense. We need a political agenda that goes after terrorists rather than fighting unnecessary and stupid wars.

What we don't need is corruption and cronyism. Possibly the most effective way of dealing with those problems are real ethics and campaign reform where violations are treated as felonies with meaningful fines and jail time. I do hope the Governor calls the legislature back into session to get this done. He shouldn't let them go home until it is done and every legislator's home town media should make a big deal out of their position on the issue.

I can tell you right now that one of the biggest opponents of this reform in New Mexico is the oil and gas industry. They know their money has clout in politics in this state and if you look at the legislators from the oil patch they will never vote for limiting campaign contributions in this state. Just watch and see what happens!

P.S. Here is a note I got from a reader in reference to my comments on Senator Linda Lopez' vote on Campaign Reform.

Jim, I was reading your Friday Blog concerning Linda Lopez' vote on campaign finance reform. I'm not sure if you had all the details so I thought I'd fill you in on what I saw happening. Linda did vote for the bill, first getting it out of the Rules Committee (by one vote I believe) and then voting for it on the Senate floor (I think this would been a tie without her vote). What Linda would not vote for was a last minute (literally) concurrence because nobody could explain what changes the House had made. In context you should know that Linda had just been burned on the Gift Act when the House stripped her amendment that made the law apply to all government officials (local, state, school board etc.). The Senate voted concurrence without being aware of this change. Hence her caution in wanting to know what the House had done to public financing before giving it her vote. Keep on bloggin',

1 comment:

NB said...

I'm hoping that having had Bush in office will do one thing:
Awaken the American Public that we must elect representatives who will do all of the things you say and more. I hope lots and lots of Americans open their eyes and decide to actually do something about the issues by voting in people who have these same concerns and IF they don't follow-through, get rid of them.
The message needs to come from the people versus the politicians.
All of this political questioning is giving a bad name to all politicians and, really, that's too bad because there really are some great people out there.
Money does make the politician, though, and this is an unfortunate aspect of politics that can taint or annoint...
It's very easy to abuse power... I just hope integrity will win.