Villanucci endorses Doug Turner

Though recently he said he thought
Rep Janice Arnold-Jones was the most qualified candidate.

The object of the Primary, according to Jim Villanucci, is to elect someone who can win in November, not to elect the best qualified candidate.

This runs contrary to the widely expressed belief that we can clean up government by simply electing the most qualified candidate.

Why isn't the most qualified candidate the most likely to win?

Have we taken our eyes off the ball?

Weh's conduct unsettling

Someone else first observed; "the best indicator of future performance is past performance". There is a better indicator than past performance and that is, current performance.

If the interest is in electing ethical politicians, then some attention should be paid to their manifest ethics.

For the life of me, I cannot understand how voters can watch unethical conduct during campaigns and then be surprised when it shows up again after election.

Consider Colonel Allen Weh's current campaign;

1. he claims he isn't a politician, and
2. he is misrepresenting Lt Gov Diane Denish's use of Richardson's jet, and
3. he is "push polling", and
4. he still has not stepped up to the consequences of his alleged physical assault on a member(s) of the NMRP staff.

1. By any reasonable definition, Weh is a politician. To represent otherwise, in order to cash in on anti-politician public sentiment, is not honest.

2. Weh is running TV ads that have misrepresented Denish's use of the state jet. He claimed she used federal funds and apparently is mistaken. It appears she was using state tax dollars to fly to the parade. The mistake could well be innocent. Continuing to run that ad after he knows that he is spreading an untruth, is not so innocent.

3. According to blogger Monahan, Weh is conducting a push poll. Push polls are actually illegal in some states, because they are so blatantly unethical.

4. There is every reason to believe that there was a physical assault. The details are germane to the discourse surrounding his candidacy. Everybody makes mistakes; only a few have the character and the courage to admit to them and accept the consequences.

How will Weh conduct himself if elected?

What are you going to believe,
his ads on radio and TV, or your lying eyes?

Look to his current conduct.

Torches and Pitchforks at Rio Grande High School

Several hundred students walked out of their classes at Rio Grande High School yesterday. They were protesting their exclusion from the decision making process that replaced two administrators as their school.

They are on firm philosophical ground. As students, they are expected to model and promote the Pillars of Character Counts!. According to various of the six Pillars, stakeholders have a right to meaningful participation in decision making that affects their interests.

What does participation mean exactly? That varies from situation to situation of course, but at the very least would include sharing of timely and accurate information about any administrative changes at their school.

APS Supt Winston Brooks, by his own deliberate choice, is not honestly accountable to the higher standards of ethical conduct that he enforces upon students. He holds them accountable for their respect for the rights of others, yet will not hold himself accountable as a role model of the same standard.



Brooks and the rest of the leadership of the APS have not been actually accountable as role models, and removed even the pretense of it, when they removed the Role Modeling Clause from their own standards of conduct. It used to read;

In no case shall the standards of conduct for an adult,
be lower than the standards for students.

John Kennedy is credited with the observation;

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible,
make violent revolution inevitable.

If Brooks had showed any respect at all for the stakeholders at RGHS, there would not have been the need for students to rise up in protest.

As a result of the student demonstration, ten of them have been granted an audience with Brooks. Not that it will do any good, the skunk is not going to change it's stripe, but you have to give the kids credit for standing up for what they believe in.

Perhaps their example will not be lost on the adults in their community.




photo Mark Bralley

APS principal swap wrong headed.

APS Supt Winston Brooks has called a Chinese Fire Drill, wikilink, for more than two dozen principals this week.

APS does this every couple of years, link. It resets the clock on their many failures.

It is an accountability dodge .
Asses are being covered.

Lemons are marching. Brooks would have you believe "good" principals are on the march as well. But why? Why would he move a successful principal?

Among other things, successful schools have a synergy.
If a principal, a staff, and a community have a good synergy,
why destroy it?

Brooks would have you believe that the problems in APS schools can be solved by simply applying the right administrator. A failing school under the right administrator will succeed.

Never mind the accumulated experience, expertise, and investment of students, staff, parents, and community.

There are well over 70,000 years of teaching experience alone, in the APS, and no seat at the table where decisions are made. No seat at the table where principals are hired and fired.

No seat at the table for students. No seat at the table for parents. No seat at the table for anyone but Winston Brooks.

Brooks wants the authority to move principals around at his whim, but does not want to be held accountable for his decision.

If just the principal of Rio Grande High School was moved, RGHS stakeholders would tell him, I told you so.

If just the principal of Jimmy Carter Middle School was moved, JCMS stakeholders would tell him, I told you so.

If just the principal of (substitute the failing school of your choice) was moved, FSoYC stakeholders would tell him, I told you so.

But if he trots 28 principals around in a circle for awhile, it all becomes a blur.

Brooks never has to admit his administrative failure.

And if we fired him tomorrow,
we would still owe him two years of pay, link.



Side note;

Take this job and shove it!

The Principal at APS' crown jewel; La Cueva High School,
was headed for Jimmy Carter Middle School.

She retired instead.

photo Mark Bralley

Rep Wilson did not mention Rep Janice Arnold-Jones by name, but ...

Former Rep Heather Wilson has posted an essay on Heath Haussamen's site, link, entitled;

Restoring ethics: Eight ways to clean up Santa Fe

Read it, and then think of the six people who would be Governor.

There is no legitimate agenda that does not move forward when we elect a Governor who will clean up Santa Fe.

Clean and fair government is all anyone in either Party has a right to expect.

Government that is transparently accountable to the people serves every legitimate agenda.

Government that is lean and efficient serves every legitimate agenda.



Proven competence,
proven character,
proven courage.


It's a no-brainer.




photos Mark Bralley

DA Susana Martinez does not keep those statistics.

I had emailed the Custodian of Public Records at DA Susana Martinez' Office. I explained that I had heard that, Martinez has been "reversed on appeal" more than most DAs. I asked for a record of that statistic, or in lieu of an actual "record", a candid, forthright and honest answer to the question.

I have received the following from her Office, quoted in significant part; (the rest being a list of the accolades earned by members of their team).

I believe that the information that you were told is incorrect.

Further, I am not aware of anyone with statistics on this topic. I have been with this office as Chief Deputy District Attorney since 1997 (and I have been a prosecutor in New Mexico even longer) and have never been aware of records being kept that would address your question.

Susan M. Riedel
Chief Deputy District Attorney and
Custodian of Records for the
Third Judicial District Attorney's Office

OK, I'll bite. Why not?

Heads will not roll in a Denish administration.

By any reasonable measure, state government is in shambles.

Some responsibility for current mess falls upon the shoulders of the people who have been running it for the last eight years.

The heavy hitters in the Richardson administration would like to hang around for at least another four years in the Denish administration as well, according to Joe Monahan, link.

If Lt Gov Diane Denish is the only one changing seats, how does anything change in the Roundhouse?

It will be more of the same old, same old.

How does she pretend she was anything but complicit in
or complacent about, the corruption swirling around her?

photo Mark Bralley

"A plague o' both your houses!"

"This is a famous quote from Romeo and Juliet, link.
As Mercutio dies, he utters this phrase three times,
cursing the families whose rivalry led to his death.

The phrase is commonly applied to criticize warring factions
whose rivalry brings ruin to others. "

Government of the Party, by the Party, and for the Party
is not the same thing as government of the people,
by the people, and for the people.

Partisan politics cannot serve the interests of the whole.
Partisan politics sustain Party politics.
Party politics sustains Parties, not people.

What about the people's politics?

Do we really need someone to tell us who to vote for?
Do we really need someone to write our agenda?

All we really need is, a champion.

Let's say you are a Democrat, but you don't want to vote for Denish

There are Democrats who cannot do the Richardson - Denish - Colón thing, even if they hold their nose.

Which Republican will thinking, open-minded, and moderate Democrats prefer?

It would depend on their individual priorities. If one of them approached a single issue priority, they would be inclined toward the candidate who shared the single issue.

On the other hand, I did stipulate thinking, moderate, and open-minded.

They would be interested in a the candidate who would assure them a seat at the table where all issues would see open and honest discussion.

They would be interested in a Governor who made time to meet with them, not off playing Crime Scene Investigator somewhere. They would be interested in a Governor who will greet their different perspective with a smile and handshake, not a baseball bat.

They will be most interested in Rep Janice Arnold-Jones.

photo Mark Bralley

A seat at the table.

No one is entitled to more or less than, a seat at the table.

If the table functions well, it can make decisions that manifest the will of the people. With the right people at the table, it can work.

It is a function of government to provide for its citizens, seats at the table. It is a function of government to provide for; "government by the people".

There is no legitimate agenda that does not move forward on the day that government functions as an independent facilitator of the will of the people, and not of the will of power and privilege.

A seat at the table for citizens, could be the product of the next meeting of the Restructuring Committee. Or maybe not.
OK, probably not. It has never happened before.

There is a live ball lying on the playing field.

On that day, the ball will be carried toward or away from the goal; a people's seat at the table.

So far, the ball is just sitting there. No one wants to pick it up.

No one wants to take responsibility for putting together the People's Plan; an unequivocal outline of the terms of politics and public in-servitude, according to people's interests.

There is an election coming up.

It is the opportunity for a referendum on reform.

It is an opportunity to compel candidates to pick a side on open government.

Let's make the election about restructuring government.

Let's elect the candidates who will hold themselves transparently accountable to meaningful standards of conduct and competence; and throw out those who will not.

The best next Governor, is the candidate who shows real leadership right now. Not with a promise about what they may or may not do after they're elected, but right now, before the election.


Somebody needs to pick up the ball and run with it.

Az immigration law suffered from narrow thinking.

The legislative process does not lend itself to the development of novel solutions; or even good solutions. It is one guy's final draft against the system. Rep Al Park complained about it during opening remarks at the Governmental Restructuring Committee meeting.

He spoke of reform bills that he had carried in to the system,
only to see them summarily dismissed.

If they follow past practice; some final draft will be concocted
(sometimes in secret) and a bill will appear.

Folks will pick sides according their own agenda, and they will tell us what they are willing to do by way of restructuring.

It is not their call.

The terms of public in-servitude are the prerogative of the public, not of the public servant.

If they are not willing to provide transparent accountability; if they cannot return to us, control over power and resources that are fundamentally our own, they need to be replaced with people who are. Rep Janice Arnold-Jones comes to mind.

Our will is that they create a revolutionary reform that places control over our power and resources, solidly in our hands.

In 192 days, we will be standing at the polls ready to hold them accountable to that standard. We will need a few days before hand, let's say 20, to talk about the reform package.

End date then; NTE 172 days from this.

Is Susana Martinez even a good DA?

Susana Martinez says, vote for her for Governor because
she is doing such a great job as District Attorney.

There are statistics that could be used to substantiate a claim like that. For example, if she is a great District Attorney, she could point to a statistic that shows she has a high conviction rate. She hasn't, and you have to wonder why.

There are statistics that would disprove the claim. If for instance, she was being reversed on appeal an inordinately large percentage of the time, that statistic would indicate she was doing a bad job as District Attorney.

I emailed her Office this morning, at 7:53 am, and asked for a public record that reflected her rate of reversals. I also offered to forgo the records request if they would simply give me a candid, forthright and honest answer to the question.

No answer.

Under "the law", they can handle it as a request for public records and wait up to three business days to respond. According to any higher standard of conduct than the law, they would have at least acknowledged its receipt by email reply.

One would think if the rate of reversals were low, and the rate of convictions were high, both statistics would be posted on her website. They are not.

My experience leads me to conclude that the truth is hidden
only when it's bad.

Will you help restructure the Roundhouse?

Or will you let legislators do it? in meetings that can still be
held behind your back, "legally".

As far as I know, the first meeting of the Government Restructuring Committee was not videotaped by anybody.

The opportunity for you to participate meaningfully in decisions that affect your interests, is long gone. You can't go back and watch the record. There is no webcasting of interim committee no matter how consequential their work.

Why not, how was the war over robust webcasting lost?

The war need champions, and we had champions.

There were people from the dais and from the bleacher seats alike, who picked up the flag, charged into the wall, and created a breach.

They prevailed momentarily, and then lost. They lost because when they looked around to see who was with them, they found themselves standing nearly alone.

They had won the battle and lost the war.



If Rep Janice Arnold-Jones had been surrounded by those whose interests she was defending, we would not have lost the war.






If those who she was fighting for, had then joined the fight, we would not now have;

• legislative webcasting that is an affront to the citizens of New Mexico.
• a surrender of public records that is an affront to the citizens of New Mexico.
• deliberative meetings behind closed doors that are an affront to the citizens of New Mexico.

Rep Janice Arnold-Jones can lead restructuring. She has shown you the competence, she has shown you the character, and she has shown you the courage it will take to clean the rot out of the Roundhouse.

Let's not make the same mistake twice.

photos Mark Bralley

Jim "the enforcer" Scarantino

Because New Mexico doesn't have any worthwhile mechanism for dealing with political corruption and incompetence, the burden goes uncarried, or must be carried by those whose job it is not.

Jim Scarantino is getting some help, link.

For as long as politicians and public servants continue to
refuse to provide a mechanism under which they can be held
honestly accountable for their conduct and competence,
citizens will have to create their own.

Thank God for those who are picking up the slack.

Brooks nixes student pay.

There are a number of schools across the nation that are experimenting with paying students to succeed; cash for hard work and good grades. As might be expected, there is some push back, although there is some empirical data suggesting that it works, link.

There is no such thing as a disengaged learner;
you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

If there is a student who doesn't want to learn, they will not.
If they decide to learn because they want a few dollars for a
good test score, they will.

Some local students wanted to run the concept by APS Supt
Winston Brooks, who had nothing better to do than to
run by the school, chat with them, and oh yeah, get his picture
in the Journal in a "feel good" story, link.

"Nepotism Is No Problem at Charter School"

Thus read the headline in a Journal report this morning, link.

I would suggest that the whole point of the report was to get people to think there is in fact, a problem with nepotism in charter schools. If there is no problem, why write the story at all; why put it on the front page? Since when does the unstory get front page coverage?

Recently, auditors from the Council of the Great City Schools revealed that there were real problems with nepotism in the administration of the APS. Did the Journal report that? No. Did they do any kind of investigation of their own? No.

Yet they're are willing to point to the possibility that there is a problem in charters even though they conclude, in the end, that there is not.

The leadership of the APS needs to get used to the fact that the void they are leaving in the education of 90,000 of this community's sons and daughters is going to be filled by charter schools. And further that, the charters are going to do a better job of it because they are not locked into the rigid thinking that keeps APS using a model that no longer works.

They need to call off their cronies at the Journal, and allow them to write uplifting stories about charter school successes rather than having them write stories whose point is to try to make the second horse in the race; APS, look like the winner.

We're paying Monica Armenta and her crew a million dollars* a year to do that.

*The real cost of the APS Communications Department is unknown except to the leadership of the APS. If you search the APS website for "communications department budget" you get no answer.

I have a question for the candidates.

The question is this, and stands by itself. There is currently in progress, an interim legislative committee whose task it is, to write a restructuring plan for an administration in ethical and legal shambles.

What is your plan?

Will you post it on your website?

Alright, two questions then.

Anyone who would like to meet Rep Janice Arnold-Jones and then take her up on her offer to answer your every question, truthfully, you have that opportunity this evening between 5:30 and 6:30 at her campaign office. The office is a block north of Menaul on Pennsylvania, on the west side. There will be another opportunity tomorrow from 4 pm until 7 pm in the Quigley Park area.

Meet the Candidate Tonight!

Q&A With Janice Arnold-Jones!

Thursday, April 22nd 5:30 to 6:30 PM

Campaign Headquarters

2625 Pennsylvania, NE Suite 200

(Just North of Menaul)

RSVP Appreciated: staff@janiceforgovernor.com

Meet the Candidate II

Friday, April 23rd 4:00 to 7:00 PM

Residence of Winnie Schmidt

2916 Cuervo, NE

Quigley Park Area, South of Candelaria

RSVP Appreciated: staff@janiceforgovernor.com

Whose plan to restructure should we use?

17 legislators (primarily) and executive branch members are charged with creating a plan to restructure our government.

Alternatively, the people could draw up such a plan, and present it to the committee for them to implement.

Wouldn't it be swell, if all the non-government and politics heavy hitters of every persuasion sat down with the intention of advancing a non-partisan public interests agenda, and write a restructuring plan that would guarantee it.

Their version would include of course, transparency limited only by the spirit of the law, and inescapable accountability for politicians and public servants who will not tell the truth.

In either case, we must have something on the table before the November 2nd.

Else, how are we going to hold them accountable if they fail?

"The end of democracy and the defeat of the American Revolution

will occur when government falls into the hands of lending institutions and moneyed incorporations."

Thomas Jefferson

"It's the redistribution of weath, stupid"*

*"It's the economy, stupid" wikilink

The Founding Fathers argued, convincingly,
citizens have a right to own property.
They claimed, because they believed,
the right to own property come from God.

Not to mention that they recognized it as
an inherent human right, regardless.

So if someone claims the right to take one wo/mans property
from them without their consent and then, give it to another;
is it reasonable to expect them to cite justification?

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” - Benjamin Franklin

The pity is that, as fundamental an issue as; the redistribution
of wealth as a legitimate function of government,
cannot enjoy civil discourse and debate, even during elections.

The Founding Fathers could do it, why can't we?