Who Let the Dog In?

The House of Representatives got a celebrity visit this morning: Duane Chapman, aka Dog the Bounty Hunter.

No, the Dog wasn't there to serve any outstanding warrants.

He was there to show support for Rep. Jim Smith's House Bill 313, which would authorize a licensed bail bondsmen to retain the services of a fugitive recovery agent -- a bounty hunter - to investigate, locate, arrest, and hold a fugitive after notifying local law enforcement.

The bill would hold the bail bondsman responsible for the qualifications and behavior of the fugitive recovery agents they hire and establishes requirements for bounty hunters.

Dog didn't speak to the House. The bill still is in the House Business & Industry Committee.

Cat & Dog

ROUNDHOUSE ROUNDUP: Real ID Can't Pass Real Committee

A version of this was published in The Santa Fe New Mexican 
February 10, 2013

Who says Democrats and Republicans in the Legislature can’t put aside partisan differences, roll up their sleeves and come together and agree on legislation?

This happened just last week. And no, I’m not talking about some apple-pie memorial honoring some 4-H Club. I’m talking about a real, live controversial issue that ended up with a unanimous, bipartisan vote in a House committee.

The bill was House Bill 144, sponsored by Rep. Paul Bandy, R-Aztec. The legislation would require the state Motor Vehicle Act to create a new kind of identification card that would comply with the stringent requirements of the federal Real ID Act.

Last week, the House Health, Government and Indian Affairs Committee spoke with one voice on the bill.

The panel unanimously tabled it — effectively killing the bill.

It’s not surprising that there’s across-the-board opposition to Real ID, which requires documentation of legal residency status to obtain a license.

After all, only 13 states have adopted driver’s licenses that comply with the Real ID Act, which was passed by Congress in 2005 to standardize the driver’s license system nationwide. And 17 state legislatures around the country have passed laws forbidding their states to comply with the law, and several other legislatures have passed resolutions stating opposition to the law.

What’s surprising about this action is that just last October, Gov. Susana Martinez wrote to the federal Department of Homeland Security, wanting to know whether the feds would be extending the deadline for states to comply. At that point, the deadline for state compliance was in January.

“Unfortunately, New Mexico’s practice of giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants not only poses a significant and well-documented public safety threat, it also undermines the validity and security of every New Mexico driver’s license,” Martinez said in a letter to the department. “It’s deeply concerning that New Mexicans who work at our labs, get on an airplane or need to show identification at any other federal facility will no longer be able to use their driver’s license to do so.”

By late December, Homeland Security announced that the deadline would be extended again. Still, supporters of the governor’s long-thwarted move to repeal the law that allows the state to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants continue to use the Real ID argument to advocate for the repeal.

Bandy’s bill offered a possible way around the driver’s license issue. New Mexico driver’s license would be unchanged, but the new ID card would be ready in case the feds actually do start enforcing the act and requiring “Real IDs” to board planes or to enter federal buildings.

But Republicans weren’t going for it. The comment made by the one Republican to speak on the bill was that it would “take the heat off the Legislature to fix the driver’s licenses.”

The committee’s vote was praised by the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico's director of public policy. Steve Allen said the ACLU “is pleased that both parties in the Legislature don’t have any interest in implementing the Real ID Act. We applaud them.”

But Bandy said, “We’re going to need to do something soon.”

The Homeland Security news release in December announcing the latest Real ID deadline extension said the department by this coming autumn expects to publish a schedule for compliance. No actual date for implementation has been set.

More strange bedfellows: So we have Republicans on the House Health, Government and Indian Affairs Committee voting with the American Civil Liberties Union on the Real ID bill. But that’s not the only strange alliance in this session.

Just the day before, the Senate Judiciary Committee tabled Sen. Peter Wirth’s bill that would have specifically outlawed texting while driving. Most Republicans on the committee voted against the bill, which was opposed by the state Criminal Defense Lawyer Association. Meanwhile, most Democrats voted for the bill — which was supported by a couple of big corporations, Verizon and AT&T.

Just another Roundhouse do-si-do.

Governor Supports Gun Compromise

The Roundhouse press corps just spoke with Gov. Susana Martinez after a short speech in the Rotunda.

Among the questions asked was whether she supports the House Bill 77 compromise, which passed the House Judiciary Committee Friday night.That bill would require background checks on people who buy guns at gun shows.

"I think I could support it if it stays the way it is, that has, number one, keeping the guns out of the hands who people who don't have any business having guns.," she told reporters.

The people who have no business having guns, she said, are people who have been "declared mentally ill through the court system" and those who have been convicted of felonies.

The bill still has to go to the House Appropriations & Finance Committee before it gets to the House floor. And if it passes there, it still has to go through the Senate.

UPDATE: 4:04 pm. The House Democrats say that HB 77 will be debated by the full House on Wednesday.

Great Guns! Committee Approves Gun Show Bill with Bi-Partisan Support

After struggling with House Bill 77 for several days, the House Judiciary Committee Friday night passed a gun-control bill aimed at requiring background checks for people purchasing firearms at gun shows.

Surprisingly the bill passed with bipartisan support on a 13-3 vote.

The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Miguel Garcia, D-Albuquerque, praised committee members, including Rep. Nate Gentry, R-Albuquerque, who opposed the bill in its original form but helped craft compromise amendments for the bill that allowed it to make it through the committee.

Unlike the original version, the bill would not require background checks for people buying guns in private transactions outside of gun shows. The new version of the bill also would establish a procedure to align the state’s mental health and criminal conviction records with the federal instant background check system.

The law currently requires background checks for gun purchases from licensed dealers, whether at retail stores or gun shows. However bill supporters say that currently some 40 percent of all gun sales in the state do not require background checks.

Last week the committee stalled on the original version of the bill, leading many, including myself, to consider it dead.

It's not over yet for HB 77. It still has to go to the House Appropriations & Finance Committee before it gets to the House floor. And if it passes there, it still has to go through the Senate -- and then get signed by our pistol-packin' governor.

Double Marijuana Hit

Not one but two pieces of legislation were introduced in the state Legislature.

The first is one I discussed with Sen. Jerry Ortiz y Pino, D-Albuquerque, a few weeks ago.

Senate Joint Memorial 31 requests that the state Economic Development Department convene work group, conduct a study and report back to the Legislature on the budgetary implications of taxing and regulating marijuana in New Mexico.

"It is time to study how wasteful New Mexico’s punitive marijuana laws are and how they continue to sustain a massive, increasingly violent underground economy, waste scarce law enforcement resources, and rob New Mexico tax-payers of millions in potential revenue," said Emily Kaltenbach,  state director with the Drug Policy Alliance in a news release.

Ortiz y Pino told me earlier that he would like to have a study in hand when he introduces a constitutional amendment to legalize the drug next year.

"Whether by the hand of lawmakers or a fed-up electorate, these laws are going to change," Kaltenbach said. She said a study would also "bring to light how the safe regulation of marijuana would undermine criminal enterprises on both sides of the border, while boosting New Mexico’s economy and protecting New Mexicans’ safety."

The voters in the states of Colorado and Washington decided to legalize marijuana last year.

The other piece of legislation is House Bill 465 sponsored by Rep.Emily Kane, D-Albuquerque.

Under the bill, possession of up to 4 ounces  of marijuana would be a civil penalty with increasing fines between $50 and $300. Possession of more than four but less than eight ounces would be a misdemeanor with no potential for jail time.

Currently, in this state, possession of up to one ounce of marijuana is a petty misdemeanor crime with fines and possible jail time. Possession of more than one ounce and up to 8 ounces is a full misdemeanor crime with bigger fines and possible jail time of up to a year.

Kane, a firefighter in Albuquerque, said in her experience in responding to fires, accidents and incidence of violence, she's seen plenty of bad situations caused by alcohol and drugs like meth and crack. "But I've yet to respond to a call caused by marijuana," she told me.

This bill appears to have legs at least in the House. Among the co-sponsors of Kane's bill are House Speaker Kenny Martinez, Majority Leader Rick Miera and Majority Whip Moe Maestas.

More in tomorrow's New Mexican.

Senate Judiciary Tables Texting Bill

In my story in today's paper about the Senate Judiciary Committee's tabling of Sen. Peter Wirth's bill to ban texting while driving, I spoke with Johanna Terrazas, a Chama resident whose father-in-law Alberto Terrazas, was killed in an accident involving a teenager the family believes was texting just before the wreck.

“Maybe I should email [senators who voted against the bill] a couple of photos of my father-in-law’s vehicle,” she told me.

She emailed me one such photo. Here it is:

ROUNDHOUSE ROUNDUP: The Latest Purge Scare

A version of this was published in The Santa Fe New Mexican 
Feb. 3, 2013


At least a couple of elections officials in Santa Fe and Albuquerque have some concerns about the way that Secretary of State Dianna Duran wants to clean up New Mexico voter rolls.

Duran last week sent a letter to all county clerks on Jan. 25 outlining a dilemma and how she proposes to handle it.

The letter first was publicized by the liberal group Progress Now New Mexico, whose director, Pat Davis declared, “Dianna Duran can’t wait to purge voters.”

The elections officials I talked to didn’t go that far. But both said there are potential problems in that letter.

The background: The National Voter Registration Act says there are only two reasons a voter can be removed from the official list of eligible voters for changing an address.

One is if the voter confirms in writing that he or she has moved to a different jurisdiction. The other is if the voter has failed to respond to a confirmation notice and hasn’t voted or appeared to vote from the date of the notice through the date of the next two general elections for federal office.

But here’s where the problem starts: As has been widely reported — even in this column — in 2009 the confirmation notices mailed out by Duran’s predecessor did not comply with federal law, and the sticklers at the Department of Justice ruled it invalid.

Thus, Duran wrote in her letter, “It appears the state may not in 2011 or 2013 lawfully remove voters from its official list of eligible voters based solely on a suspected but unconfirmed change of address.”

Gotta purge somebody: In that letter, Duran notes that the federal law “continues to obligate the state to take reasonable steps as part of its general program of list maintenance to remove persons from the voter rolls who have become ineligible for other reasons, such as death, disqualifying felony conviction, or mental incapacity as provided for by state law.”

She also pointed to a state law that requires individual county boards of registration to meet no later than March 15. What to do?

Duran said the Attorney General’s Office advised her that the boards of registration should meet to “review the list of eligible voters … Based on the AG’s guidance, any individuals identified by the board of registration shall be reviewed and investigated by the Secretary of State …” That investigation would determine whether a voter should be removed from the rolls.

Possible problems: Santa Fe County’s veteran elections director, Denise Lamb, has no problem with thinning out bloated voting lists. She said following the 2008 election, following regular procedure, Santa Fe Country purged between 4,000 and 5,000 names from its voter list.

“But you do have to follow federal law,” Lamb said. She said she’s contacted Duran’s office with a simple question, “Can the duties of the board of registration be expanded without statutory authority?” She said that nowhere in the law does it say that boards of registration report names to the secretary of state for investigation.

Bernalillo County Maggie Oliver, a possible Democratic challenger to Republican Duran in 2014, also has concerns about the new process outlined by Duran. Oliver said last week she also wonders about the practicality of the individual county boards reviewing the entire voter roll — especially in the larger counties.

According to the latest registration figures, there are 430,923 voters in Bernalillo County and 99,452 in Santa Fe County.

But the Attorney General’s Office said there is no legal problem here. “We don’t believe this is an expansion of the board of registration’s duties,” said Phil Sisneros, a spokesman for Attorney General Gary King, who, for the record, is a Democrat.

Regarding the logistics question, Duran’s chief of staff, Ken Ortiz, said his office is “working closely with the AG; we are in the process of developing guidelines for how counties may ensure compliance with both the state and federal laws in question.”