NM Pop Politics

On Wednesday, SFR broke a story about Jerome Block Jr., the Democratic nominee for Public Regulation Commission, and his semi-sordid court record, which included undisclosed DWI-related arrests, a urinating in public charge, and missing court dates and court-ordered mediation in a child support case. Block had also missed the interview he scheduled with SFR to discuss and would not return calls.

Block speaks out today, above the fold, in both the Santa Fe New Mexican and the Albuquerque Journal. In both papers, Block denies (or at least denies remembering) the disorderly conduct charge for urinating in public on Albuquerque Police Department property during the city’s annual Summerfest in 1998.

But, before we get to that, SFR needs to set the record straight on Tom Sharpe’s version of the story. According to his piece:

The Santa Fe Reporter this week reported an Albuquerque police report showed Block Jr. was arrested for disorderly conduct after he urinated on a bush five yards from crowded foot traffic on Civic Plaza during the annual Summerfest.

This is incorrect. SFR reported that Block was “cited,” that is, issued a citation on the street by an officer and that Block received two failure-to-appear charges for missing court dates on the charge. Had Sharpe read the piece thoroughly, he wouldn’t have made that meta-mistake, reporting incorrectly what another paper reported accurately.

However, over at the Albuquerque Journal, Raam Wong (who gets props for being another journalist with a AA name) got it right and even went so far as to show the police report to Block:

“I don’t recall being at Summerfest or being cited,” said Block, 31, of La Puebla.

After looking at a police report that describes the incident and confirming that it contained accurate personal information, Block repeated that he did not think he committed the offense.

“I don’t see myself being at Summerfest after (the DWI charge),” said Block, explaining that he was pretty shaken up after the DWI incident. “I can honestly say I think I would recall being cited for urinating in a bush. And I don’t think I would urinate in a bush at a police station.”

So, Block denies the incident but Wong does get him to admit that he “might have been” drunk the night he was arrested in 1998 on aggravated DWI charges and that it was a mistake to tell the Journal that he was found “not guilty” when the case was actually dismissed on procedural grounds. Wong also gets Block to admit to a second undisclosed arrest for riding in a car with a drunk driver.

Block said he agreed to ride with the driver, Robert Martinez, because his friend was distraught and thinking of causing physical harm to himself.
“I didn’t want him to hurt himself,” Block said.
Block says he didn’t have time to assess whether Martinez was drunk because, within minutes, they had been pulled over by police.

The irony should be noted: Because Block didn’t want Martinez to hurt himself, he let Martinez get behind the wheel with a BAC of .21, almost three times the legal limit. It would take seven-ten drinks in an hour to get to that point and that’s not even mentioning the typical symptoms of drunkenness.

In any event, Sharpe didn’t report on the second arrest and instead let Block further deny the disorderly conduct charge and applaud his supporters:

…That (DWI) incident really had me shaken up, and I stayed away pretty much socially, and I wouldn’t ever attend a Summerfest after something like that happened to me.”

He also said, “Right now, my supporters have rallied once again, and they’re upset about this whole deal, and they don’t have any question about my character, and they will show it on Election Day in November when they elect me to the PRC.”

It’s not easy to say who these supporters are. In the six-way primary, Block won with less than a quarter of the vote. And, according to the Secretary of State’s final tally, Block only won one county in the PRC district: San Miguel County. Bruce Throne won Santa Fe County, Arthur Rodarte won Rio Arriba and Taos counties and Joe Maestas won Sandoval County.

Well, don’t count righty blogger Mario Burgos among those supporters. Burgos was the first from both sides of the blogosphere to advocate on behalf of Green Party challenger Rick Lass: “Wow, are the people in District 3 really going to give this guy [Block] a $90,000 a year job that makes policy decisions? There are no Republicans running, but just based on Jerome Block’s legal troubles, I suggest that the Green in race deserves a second look,” Burgos writes.

Unity, New Hampshire that is. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama made peace and expressed mutual support in the very state in which the epic showdown–”spirited discussion,” to use Clinton’s euphemization–began. Euphemism and other rhetorical techniques won the day as the two politicians “stood united” to champion “old-fashioned ideas” and, of course,the “fight” for “progress” in “every corner of this great nation that we love”. Enthusiasm ran high at the Democratic rally, and according to recent polls voter enthusiasm in the Democratic party is about twice what it is amongst Republicans (after all, who really cared when Mitt Romney came out for John McCain?). After the last seven-and-a-half years it is not hard to understand why. At this point any change in the White House might be a good change, but can enthusiasm alone bring the good ol’ U.S. of A. out of the slump? For now, the Democratic party seems to think so. (Josiah Stephens)

Today the Santa Fe Reporter broke a story about Jerome Block Jr. , the 31-year-old Democratic nominee for Public Regulation Commissioner, and his legal record, which betrays a history of DWI-related arrested and skipping court hearings (for a “urinating in public” charge and child-support mediations).

The son of former PRC Commissioner Jerome Block Sr., Block Jr. won the Democratic Primary with only 22 percent of the vote. This could be an opening for Rick Lass, the Green Party’s nominee for the seat formerly held by Ben Ray Lujan, who abandoned it to run for Congress. There is no Republican challenger.

Yesterday, Lass turned in the required signatures to get on the ballot and the required small contributions to qualifiy for public campaign financing. After the story about Block hit the stands, we rang up Lass for his take on the race.

SSOM: I was just wondering whether you have a comment for the record?

RL: Well, I had no idea of the depth of Jerome Jr’s personal history. One of the reasons I’m running is because I just don’t believe these family dynasties should be making important decisions for the citizens of New Mexico.

So, when do you get your public campaign money?

Within 17 days. The state has 10 days to certify me and after that they have seven days to send me the check.

You got plans for the first check you’re going to cut?

I don’t have plans. We’re working on the budget stuff right now. I’ve still got a little bit of seed money I’m allowed to spend, so we’ll be using that to build a campaign team and get the phones and all that kind of infrastructure.

Do you see this race, in the larger picture, as an opportunity for the Green Party to re-exert itself in New Mexico?

I absolutely see it. This is the perfect example of why there needs to be a Green Party. When the Democrats nominate people like Tom Udall and Peter Wirth, Greens stand aside and support those candidates. But when the Democratic Party messes up and nominates a Jerome Block Jr, it’s a chance for people to see we need a multi-party democracy and we need strong third parties.

Well, Block didn’t do too well in Santa Fe County, but how are you going to take on northeastern counties where Block performed well enough to win the nomination?

I’m going to be traveling. We’re on our way right now to rally in support of Los Alamos workers’ rights in Espanola and we’re planning in being Las Vegas next week for the Fourth of July. A huge chunk of the campaign money is going to go to travel and spending the weekends in Mora, San Miguel, Rio Arriba, Taos. We got quite a number of our signatures at the Los Alamos farmers’ market, so we’ll be in Los Alamos. We did just put up a blog, if you want to check out richardlass.com. We’ve got 260,000 registered voters to meet in the next four and a half months. That’s how you win election: By shaking hands and telling people what your platform is and asking them for their votes.

A lot of citizen are “low-information voters,” who will go to the polls only to vote for President. So, if they’re going to vote for Obama, they’ll likely click Democrat all the way down the ballot. How are you going to convince people to switch from Democratic to Green on this one particular race?

Well, we’re going to bring up the things that you brought up in your article. We’re going to be bringing up that we don’t think the Block family has been progressive and we don’t think they’ve been standing up for everyday New Mexicans. When people go ‘Yes’ when they see Obama, Udall, Wirth’s names. When they see Block we hope they’ll have enough information to say ‘No’ and look at the alternative which is Rick Lass, Green Party candidate, and say yes. The message there is that we’re in this because Block is not a good candidate, he’s not going to represent the interests of everyday New Mexicans and Rick lass is.

Last question for you: A lot of people are theorizing that Block won because many voters thought they were voting for his father. Do you think you’d have a better chance if there had been a Rick Lass, related or not, that had been a Public Regulation Commisisioner before?

I don’t think I would have, no. I think people know that I’m a progressive. Three-quarters of the Democrats voted for a qualified candidate and they lost and they’re feeling hurt. We didn’t gather 3,317 signatures based on just the Green Party. There’s a lot of pissed off Democrats out there that realize the system did not work for them. The Republicans don’t have a candidate. They have these same pocketbook issues that Greens, Independents and Democrats have when PNM and Qwest keeping asking for more, more, more. No one on the PRC is asking those hard questions, like, “You’re asking your customers to tighten their belts, why don’t you tighten your budget and quit paying seven-figure salaries to your CEOs?” and, “What are you advertising for when you’re a monopoly?” Those are the questions that need to be asked by the PRC and the legislature and I’m going to be asking them for the next four months and then I’m going to be asking them four years as the PRC Commissioner from northeastern New Mexico.

Leland Lehrman, who announced his candidacy for the US Senate in December on a platform of reinvestigating 9/11 [Outtakes, Dec. 5; “Truth ‘n’ Politics”] and other dodgy political affairs, has told SFR he has abandoned his bid for office.

After failing to drum up enough support to compete in the Democratic primary, Lehrman had indicated to SFR that he would instead run as an Independent. Family commitments (four kids, one of whom just had surgery), along with his business interests, such as his teahouse on Palace Ave. and the biweekly newspaper, The Sun News, which he edits, forced him to reconsider his plans, Lehrman says.

“Running for senate takes a lot of energy,” he says. “And, I can voice my political opinions in my newspaper every two weeks.”

He has already spent the $2,000 he raised in his campaign and gave no indication that he plans to reimburse his contributors.

“I spent it mainly traveling,” he says. “I would use it to go to Albuquerque for conventions and Democratic meetings. I went to Las Cruces and spoke a few times; I feel that I got my voice heard.”

But who does he plan to vote for, now that he’s out of the running? He is considering endorsing the Democratic nominee, US Rep. Tom Udall, and said he might meet with him today (June 20th) to discuss political matters, because he’s “not so angry at Tom” that he wouldn’t vote for him, if only because the politics of the Republican nominee, Rep. Steve Pearce, are “many degrees worse” on all fronts—environmentally, socially, and economically.

In terms of the presidential nominees, Lehrman says he is definitely not voting for the Republican presumptive nominee Sen. John McCain. He plans on “taking a look” at the presumptive Democratic nominee, Sen. Barack Obama, but with a very critical eye. (He claims that Obama has deep connections with the Rockefeller syndicate.) Once he thoroughly researches everyone on the ballot, he’ll most likely end up going for Cynthia McKinney, the Green Party candidate, Lehrman says.

“Once I’m in the box and I’m voting, I’ll probably vote for her,” he says. “She did a great job in the House of Representatives. She was the most opposed to Donald Rumsfeld and the most skeptical of the official story about September 11. It took a lot of deceptive politics to get her out of her position.”

(Reported by Emily Pepin)

At 6:21pm on June 11, a dose of sodium thiopental, the first of three chemical solutions in Texas’ lethal-injection procedure, began flowing into Karl Chamberlain’s veins. Nine minutes later, the former New Mexican who raped and murdered a young mother in Dallas was pronounced dead.

The execution had been stalled for several months as the US Supreme Court considered the constitutionality of lethal injection as a means of capital punishment. Defense lawyers argued on behalf of inmates in Kentucky that the second chemical, pancuronium bromide, which causes paralysis, could potentially prevent an inmate from alerting prison staff that he is still awake before the final deadly and excruciating dose of potassium chloride.

The Supreme Court upheld lethal injection 7-2 in April (Opinions pdf), but even some of the justices who concurred with Chief Justice John Roberts on the legalities of this specific case expressed reluctance about the death penalty on a larger scale. Justice John Paul Stevens, in his concurring opinion, wrote that he had been persuaded to believe:

… current decisions by state legislatures, by the Congress of the United States, and by this Court to retain the death penalty as a part of our law are the product of habit and inattention rather than an acceptable deliberative process that weighs the costs and risks of administering that penalty against its identifiable benefits, and rest in part on a faulty assumption about the retributive force of the death penalty.

Nevertheless, Stevens wrote that the defense had failed to make its case that lethal injection is in violation of the 8th Amendment’s bar on “cruel and unusual punishment.”

Because the US Senate must confirm Supreme Court nominees, SFR touched base with Reps. Steve Pearce and Tom Udall, both of whom are their parties’ nominees for New Mexico’s open Senate seat. In particular, we asked: How high a priority should the issue of capital punishment be when considering whether to confirm or reject Supreme Court nominees?

Rep. Steve Pearce, Republican, via voicemail message:

Basically, my concern is more in the constitutional interpretation. I would prefer a strict constructionist view of the Constitution, not judges legislating from the bench. I am very uncomfortable with the Kelo decision [on eminent domain]; those sorts of things I think are the area where my greatest concern is. I can’t imagine that we’d get down to the specifics on a person how stood on death penalty, but where they stand on Constitution and the Supreme Court. I think those are the core questions. I think that our founding fathers set the out the checks and balances. I’d just be looking for people who are willing to interpret the constitution strictly and not so much judicial activism.

Rep. Tom Udall, Democrat, via e-mailed statement:

As New Mexico Attorney General, I supported and enforced New Mexico’s law, which includes the death penalty for the most heinous crimes. I continue to support the death penalty for these crimes. I also support tough federal laws to ensure proper DNA testing so we do not imprison or execute those falsely accused of crimes. In the Senate, I will continue to make sure the death penalty is applied fairly.

I will support Supreme Court justices that uphold the Constitution. The death penalty clearly is constitutional when not used arbitrarily but above all we must make certain that we do not execute an innocent person.

The latest guilt-by-association scandal rocking the media is spinning around Clayton Williams, a former gubernatorial candidate in Texas and oil man, whose company currently drills in Texas, Louisiana and New Mexico. In 1990, when Clayton was running against revered Democrat Ann Richards, “Claytie” was overheard delivering this joke about how weather is like rape:

As long as it’s inevitable, you might as well lie back and enjoy it.

Yesterday, the Republican presumptive presidential nominee, John McCain, cancelled a fundraiser with Williams, claiming that his financial staff had previously been unaware of the comment. Democrats are now saying that canceling it isn’t enough; McCain’s gotta return the money Williams has already donated and bundled for his campaign.

The New Mexico Democratic Party has also seen a attack angle in the Williams controversy; Rep. Steve Pearce, the Republican nominee for US Senate, accepted a total of $4,000 from Williams. In a press release issued this morning, DPNM Press Secretary Conchita Cruz says:

Steve Pearce and John McCain need to do the right thing and return every dollar they have gotten from their sexist and misguided friend, Clayton Williams. Pearce’s silence on the matter is unacceptable, as Williams’ words are disturbing and out of step with New Mexico values.

Barbara Goldman, executive director of the Santa Fe Rape Crisis and Trauma Treatment Center, also reacted lividly to Williams’ comment in a phone conversation with SFR today:

I think that kind of insipid, uneducated comment is indicative of something that’s characterlogical. Those aren’t things that you just throw off as a quip. Anybody who would be so socially stupid to make that kind of remark, and I don’t care if it was 20 years ago, 100 years, that kind of glib remark about a horrific crime tells me a lot about this person’s character. And I think it’s dangerously stupid. It trivializes the atrocious nature of a crime that has always been and is just now coming to the light to be a serious pandemic in the world. I think it is only appropriate that Congressman Pearce and any other politico who has received money from this man.

Goldman has a recommendation for where Pearce can put the money:

I think it’s imperative that they give the money to a really good socially conscious cause. And I want to say this is not unprecedented. We have received money from Gov. Richardson, when he returned money from a pedophile and I thought that was a very valiant and smart thing to do. I personally stand ready to accept any money that any politician ever wants to give back when they erroneously or thoughtlessly or even knowingly took money from people who hold those dimwitted views. I promise I would apply it to provide services to our multitude of clients.

That’s a lot more diplomatic than what we were expecting; if Pearce isn’t going to donate the money to a relevant cause, then he might do well to consider sticking it where the sun don’t shine.

The Politico has an in-depth analysis of Swing Vote, the upcoming Kevin Costner political comedy that was filmed in New Mexico. Due in theaters in August, just in time to bomb before the general election, the film follows Costner’s lovable white-trash character as he’s caught in the middle of an election debacle; his vote would tip the election in the candidates favor. Thing is, his daughter actually voted for him. (Can you imagine Heather Wilson calling the US Attorney’s office to prosecute a child? We can.)

The critic from Politico (who attended a sneak preview this week) gives props to the all-star cast (Dennis Hopper, Nathan Lane, Stanley Tucci) but bashes the film a bit for relying on political stereotypes rather than fully exploring the intricacies of party politics:

Though the film skewers both Republicans and Democrats, the lion’s share of zingers are aimed at the GOP characters. While the Democrats come across as lightweight challengers, the conservative figures are depicted as storm troopers in business suits — willing to pollute beautiful landscapes in exchange for corporate payoffs and happy to cajole, badger and even bribe Costner’s character in exchange for his critical vote. If the Democrats come across as merely hapless, most of the Republicans are depicted as heartless.

Of course, SFR will be screening it anyway when it comes to theaters in August.

One of the brightest stars of this election cycle, for me, has been the glimmer in Tim Russert’s eye. It first revealed itself the night Obama won the Iowa caucus and,  combined with those eyebrows, that devilish grin,  the viewer just knew what was going through Russert’s head: This is the turning point, the moment when a new generation takes over. In his eyes, you could see that he knew that the sands of time for the old guard were running out, that this might be his last big election and he couldn’t ask for a better way to go out.

Russert passed away today at the age of 58 and that may the saddest fact of this election: Lil’ Russ couldn’t see it through the end.

You saw history, you reported history and you made history, m’man. I’ll never forget how you met the press. Rest in peace.

Santa Fe’s folk hero Jim Terr took offense at this week’s Winners & Losers, in which he was a “loser” because he’d been needlessly cybersquatting Obama-Edwards08.com. Edwards made it very clear recently that he won’t, won’t, won’t accept the role as Obama’s running mate. In particular, Terr was upset with this line:

Informed of his new “Loser” status, Terr writes via e-mail: “I’m just a publicity hound, so whether video genius, cyber-squatter or sex offender, I just want the exposure.”

FYI, Terr is not a sex offender, not that we ever thought he was. But following his angry e-mail, we did double check in order to set the record straight. It was just one of Terr’s witticisms.

Incidentally, Terr’s YouTube Channel has surpassed 200,000 views, making him Winner-worthy. At the very least, it should neutralize his Loser status making him just Jim Terr, Dude. Here’s how we described him at Artistic Overdose when he surpassed 100,000 views:

You gotta hand it to Jim. If there’s a reason to whip out a camera, a subject out there to be shot, Jim’s been there, going there or there right now. Or sitting at home manipulating stock footage into some rudimentary animation.

And when there ain’t nothing else to do, hell, he’ll just write a song and film himself playing it.

I tease and needle, because that’s the vital role he plays in Americana. He’s the self-effacing hold-nothing sacred kick-him-in-the-balls sweet ol’ folk singer that lives inside all our bleeding liberal pinko deep-down sunnbitch hearts.

Death-row inmate Karl Chamberlain, whose family still lives in New Mexico, is scheduled to be executed in the state of Texas this evening for the 1991 rape and murder of a young woman in Dallas. SFR reported on his case several months ago, when Chamberlain was the last Texas inmate to have a standing execution date–the others had been postponed due to the US Supreme Courts’ deliberation on the constitutionality of lethal injection. His date was eventually rescinded, only to be reinstated after the Supreme Court upheld the legality of the execution method.

For more information, check out SFR’s 11-minute video interview with Chamberlain’s mother, Mu’ina Arthur, who resides in Las Vegas, NM.

As far as presidential politics go, Pew reports that Republican presumptive non-nominee Ron Paul is the only candidate fully opposed to the death penalty, which is, of course, honorable considering that so few “pro-life” politicians apply that concept universally to fetuses and murderers alike. McCain is a supporter of capital punishment, though he has voted to ban the death penalty’s use on minors. Obama is, in theory, a supporter of the death penalty, but has criticized the practicality of the process and worked to reform the system in Illinois.