New Mexico State Senator Dede Feldman's Blog

For Thanksgiving: Gracias a la Vida

 

Download 13 Gracias a la Vida

It is worth listening to this classic again, and remembering how much we have to be thankful for.  

 

Election 2010: The New Mexico Legislature Faces Consequences, Possible Coalition

         The results of the recent election present tough choices for Democratic legislators, adding to the majority party’s task in dealing with a huge budget shortfall. The double whammy of lost seats and a slow recovery isn’t as bad as in some states, but it could make for some dramatic moments in the session to come.

            Ten years ago, in 2001, after another heartbreaking election in which Democrats felt cheated by a Supreme Court that handed the election to Bush, the New Mexico Senate opened with a bang. A coalition of three Democrats and the entire Republican delegation united to overthrow President Pro Tempore Manny Aragon.  The surprise move came after several days of standoff, broken when then-Gov. Gary Johnson convinced Republicans to support Sen. Richard Romero.  

            This year, with the loss of eight Democrats in the NM House, and the immediacy of a Republican administration, things are looking a little shaky for current Speaker Ben Lujan. Unlike the New Mexico Senate, Democrats in the House usually vastly outnumber Republicans, so there is little chance of a coalition. But this year the numbers are close-- 37 Dems. to 33 Reps. which means it takes only a shift in three Democratic votes to allow the Rs to elect a different speaker. 

            The South Rises Again

            Newly elected Susana Martinez is not the only Southerner in the spotlight.  Three Southern Dems. say they want Las Cruces Rep. Joseph Cervantes to be Speaker. A few years ago, Cervantes was ousted as House Judiciary Chairman when Rep. Ben Lujan successfully fought off a challenge from the young Turks, who then included Reps. Ken Martinez and Cervantes.  

            For Democrats, surviving the 2010 election, with all its rhetoric about taxes, the deficit, and the “horrors” of the Richardson administration, was an achievement. Elsewhere, it was even worse. Republicans took control of 19 more legislative chambers, and gained approximately 680 seats. They took back ten Governors’ seats from the Democrats, including the one here in New Mexico.  Even liberal bastions like Maine flipped entirely, with Republicans now controlling the Legislature and the Governor’s mansion.

            One question for the Dems in the NM House (and the Senate)  is whether they want to unite to fight for their core principles—education, health care, a decent safety net —or whether they want to cooperate in the downsizing of government that will surely be coming from the fourth floor of the roundhouse. The leadership struggle may be an indication that there are some who want to go right.

            Or not. It may simply be a personality battle, or a geographic split.   Either way it might be useful to recall what happened to us in the Senate ten years ago.  Here’s the short version: 

            For thirteen years, Sen. Manny Aragon controlled the NM Senate with a  combination of charm, brilliance, and, in the final years, secret deals and unpredictable outbursts. His combative style during the Johnson administration drew cheers from supporters and howls from detractors, with the divide growing steadily. It also led to gridlock, with veto after veto, and special session after special session.  The divide was especially painful to Democrats who took a regular drubbing from Republicans who decried the “Manny and Ray show” in what many felt was almost a racial slur. The attack was especially intense in the wake of Aragon’s controversial consulting contract with Wackenhut Corrections, a private prison corporation then bidding to operate NM prisons.

            On the opening day of the 2001 session, as expected, Manny Aragon was nominated by Sen. Joe Fidel, on behalf of the Democratic Caucus, and Sen. Joe Carraro was nominated on behalf of the Republican Caucus.   Sen. Cisco McSorley, long discontent with Sen. Aragon, nominated Sen. Richard Romero, and, in a surprise move was seconded by Sen. Leonard Tsosie, of Crownpoint.  That made three votes for Romero. With the absence of Sen. Linda Lopez, then in the hospital with complications from childbirth, it was clear that the “odd men out” had deprived the other two parties of the majority needed to win—21 votes.  And then, the jockeying for votes began. 

            The results are well known. Aragon lost the Presidency to Romero by one vote,  but Romero did not allow a Republican-controlled coalition.  Democrats maintained their committee chairs, and a budget based on Democratic values-- but accomplished in a more inclusive and compromising fashion-- was passed, and not vetoed by the governor.           

            But Democratic division persisted for the next four years and was only dissipated when newly elected Gov. Richardson insisted that Manny and Richard hold hands.

            Could the “coalition” have been forestalled?  Yes, if the Democrats had dealt with their differences over leadership openly in their caucus and chosen a leader that might not be the first choice, but with whom we could all live. But pride and personality intervened and Sen. Aragon, in particular, was not willing to step down, even though he knew, in the end, that he did not have the votes.

            Fortunately, for House Democrats, there is ample time to come to an agreement on leadership and maintain the power of the Democrats before the session.  But it will take an honest discussion of where Democrats want to go from here and not just a calculation of who can garner the most votes (from whatever direction) to be Speaker of the House.  

            Senator Dede Feldman has represented District 13 since 1997.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Change Takes Time

 

 

    Nov. 4, the day after the day after.....Earlier this week, walking the North Valley for Rep. Martin Heinrich, I came across this sign.  It reminded me that we are all on a windy path, with fits and starts, reversals, then sudden accelerations. And we can’t give up hope just because it’s taking a long time.

 

One reason I supported Martin Heinrich was that he didn’t back down from the sudden accelerations that the Obama administration started in the past two years.  These are not just the big-ticket items like health care and financial reform.  They are long-delayed items like the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which makes it harder to discriminate against women in the workplace, and a law making it harder for credit card companies to surprise you with sudden interest rate increases.  They are laws that give our college students hope and opportunities like the revamp of the student loan program and the increase in size of AmeriCorps and other service projects.  

Rachel Maddow mentioned these on her TV program the night before the election and I agree.  The Democrats could easily have kept their power dry, hoping not to offend anyone, but instead they chose to go for it. They used the political opening created by the 2006 & 2008 elections to enact some truly landmark legislation.  The impact of that legislation will not be felt for years from now—but if we can hold the line—there will be a tremendous benefit.

The same is true at the state level.  I’ve often fought official opponents to children’s’ and public health protection who say that state regulation won’t do anything but enlarge government and impede individual freedom.  That was the argument against changing the system of licensing young drivers back in 1999, when I and a number of traffic safety advocates (including the Automobile Association) said that the way to bring down the high crash rate for teens was to make them spend more time behind the wheel –practicing with an adult-- before giving them a full license.  With much difficulty, we prevailed, and even got then Gov. Garry Johnson to sign the bill.   

And now it’s beginning to pay off, eleven years later. Even the SF New Mexican, which railed against the “Nanny State" (I was the chief Nanny), now admits it was wrong in this article from a few days ago. Here’s the article…

 Graduated-license laws help cut teen driving fatalities

The New Mexican

Sunday, October 31, 2010 - 10/28/10

   
We're not major proponents of nanny government — and we're longtime supporters of teenagers' rights and responsibilities. But turn-of-the-century proposals to make teens work their way into adult driving privileges had plenty of appeal — the biggest being the chance that such an approach would save lives.

And it has: The U.S. Centers for Disease Control, the people who keep all kinds of grim statistics, reported recently that fatalities among teen drivers are down by a long ways: Between 2004 and 2008, they had fallen by one-third.

There might be other reasons for that encouraging news: safer cars, maybe even sky-high gas prices. But the feds give most of the credit to what are now known as graduated-license laws.

New Mexico was among the earlier states to impose rules on under-18 drivers. We made licensing a three-stage process:

• Six-month instructional permits, for which youngsters 15 and older, and their parents, must apply, and which involve tests and state-approved driver instruction, as well as 50 hours of supervised driving practice, among other requirements — including driving only when there's someone 21 or older on board.
• Provisional licenses, which depend on compliance with the instruction-period rules and passing a road-skills exam. For the next year, unless there's someone 21 or older along for the ride, the holder can't have more than one other kid in the car who isn't an immediate family member. And, with few exceptions, no driving between midnight and 5 a.m.
• Full licenses come only after completion of the two earlier stages — with clean driving records.

That's a far cry from what middle-aged Americans had to do for a driver's license — and for the many super-responsible teens we know, the requirements might be onerous.

But they're working — in fact, in places like New York and New Jersey, where the rules are even stricter, the fatality rates are lower. And in Wyoming, where kids are behind the wheel earlier than nearly anywhere, the teen fatality rate is highest.

That makes graduated licenses look pretty good — and makes a strong argument for demanding 'em nationally.

Politically, they might not be popular — and who wants to be the spoil-sport who ramrods them through a legislature?...

 The moral of the story is —like the sign says—Don’t Give up….Change Takes Time in Santa Fe as in Washington.  We might look like “spoil sports” now, but give it a few years.

           And as the leadership changes in the Statehouse, we hope that some common sense will prevail and not all reforms will be thrown out the window.  Some of them might save lives and money in the long run.