September 14, 2006
Lawrence H. Norton, Esq.
General Counsel
Federal Election Commission
999 E Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20463
New Mexico Bureau of Elections
325 Don Gaspar
Suite 300
Santa Fe, NM 87503
Re: Complaint Against Patricia Madrid, Madrid for Congress, Rita Longino as Treasurer
Dear Mr. Norton:
We respectfully file this complaint against Patricia Madrid, candidate for the U.S. House of Representatives in New Mexico’s First Congressional District, for illegal campaign activity made in her capacity as New Mexico Attorney General.
We remind the Commission that this is just another attempt by Patricia Madrid to violate federal election law using non-federal funds. On June 12, a complaint was filed with the Commission that informed you of Madrid’s association with a New Mexico state political action committee, Justice for America, and its likely role in funding her campaign for federal office with unregulated non-federal funds and her continuing control of non-federal funds while a candidate for federal office. In that complaint it was noted that “a large portion of the PAC’s funding came from Stanley Fulton, the owner of Sunland Park racetrack and casino. His $100,000 donation accounted for a fifth of the committee’s fundraising in the last year. Remarkably, according to an article by Jeff Jones, an Albuquerque Journal Politics writer, that donation came “just six weeks after Madrid [in her official capacity as Attorney General] officially objected to a proposed off-reservation casino” near Sunland Racetrack. See Exhibit A. Engaging in official duties in order to receive non-federal funds that assist her campaign for Congress appears to be a pattern for Attorney General Madrid. Such a pattern suggests that her violations are knowing and willful.[1]
Specifically, four of Madrid’s self-aggrandizing mail-brochures, titled “Be Afraid,” “Attorney General Patricia Madrid Has Taken Action to Protect Veterans” (hereinafter “Veterans”), “Spending too much on prescription drugs?” (hereinafter “Prescription Drugs”), and “Message From Danny Escobedo [and] Patricia Madrid” (hereinafter “Meth Lab”), are no less than self-promotional campaign flyers, paid for by state government money, disguised as informational brochures. We ask the Commission to investigate these disturbing violations and punish Madrid and her campaign accordingly.
The Brochures Clearly Constitute Campaign Communications
“Be Afraid”
“Be Afraid,” attached hereto (Exhibit B), purports to warn parents of the dangers of internet predators, but instead glorifies Patricia Madrid’s own purported achievements as state Attorney General. Costing taxpayers over $100,000, the flyer advertises Patricia Madrid far more than any public service.
The brochure reads like an obvious campaign flyer. The cover page tells the ominous story of a preyed-upon 12-year old girl and asks, “Who’s watching your daughter?” Unfolded, Madrid’s name prominently appears eight times in lines such as “Attorney General Patricia Madrid is taking action to keep New Mexico’s children safe,” and “Attorney General Patricia Madrid needs your help to protect New Mexico’s children from online predators.”
In addition, an inset designed to look like a newspaper clipping displays a quote from a January 19, 2006 piece in The Albuquerque Tribune which states that “State Attorney General Patricia Madrid has taken a much needed, aggressive stance in combating internet sexual predators who target children.” The use of the news article praising the Attorney General is neither necessary nor appropriate for an informational advertisement for a state government program. On the brochure’s reverse, a headshot of Madrid[2] prominently appears next to a quote in which she says, “I need you to help me protect New Mexico’s children and teens.” Underneath this, her name appears again in bold, large-font type.
Clearly, the flyer is more about promoting Patricia Madrid’s campaign for Congress than preventing sexual abuse on the Internet.
b. “Veterans”
Similarly, Madrid’s recent flyer regarding theft of veterans’ identities (Exhibit D) is clearly a campaign communication disguised as an official alert from the Attorney General’s office. In bold letters at the top, the flier reads, “Attorney General Patricia Madrid Has Taken Action to Protect Veterans.” Underneath, it states, “The personal information of 26.5 million veterans has been stolen due to the negligence of the Federal Department of Veterans Affairs. New Mexico Attorney General Patricia Madrid has taken action to help you deal with the crisis by developing an Identity Theft Repair Kit that can help you take back your identity.” Next to this caption is a portrait shot of Madrid—apparently the same photo which appears on “Be Afraid.” Next to this photo is a quote from Madrid—“Here in New Mexico I’ve taken action to give you the tools to take back your identity and prevent identity theft from happening to you in the future.”
This is clearly an attack by Patricia Madrid on the Federal Department of Veterans Affairs, not an appropriate subject matter for a state government informational advertisement.
c. “Prescription Drugs”
In “Prescription Drugs” (Exhibit E), Patricia Madrid makes no effort to hide the fact that the mail brochure is a piece of campaign literature. The brochure leads with the self promoting headline, “Attorney General Patricia Madrid Fighting to Keep Your Prescription Costs Down” and the face of a worried woman holding two pills. This is followed by two unnecessary quotes, purportedly from television and a local newspaper, that lavishly praise Madrid’s fighting spirit, but do nothing to inform New Mexico citizens how they or the Attorney General can control prescription drug costs. The only civic service contained in the brochure is a post card and one sentence informing New Mexicans that there exists a book containing prescription drug prices. But for this one statement, the brochure is in all respects campaign literature touting Madrid’s purported accomplishments that is printed, mailed, and paid for by the state of New Mexico. The Santa Fe New Mexican reports Madrid’s spokesman saying the brochure costs $61,257 to produce, money that came from the settlement of a class-action law suit paid into a New Mexico state fund. See Exhibit F. This is an inappropriate use of taxpayer money and constitutes a citizen funded campaign advertisement for Madrid.[3]
Technorati Tags: Blogs, Congress, Democrats, DNC, Elections, enforcement officer, New Mexico, Patricia Madrid, Politics, Republicans
These Mailings Violate Federal Source Prohibitions and State Law
While New Mexico law prohibits public officials from using their office for personal gain, N.M. Stat. Ann. § 10-16-3 (2006), Madrid has also run afoul of Federal law. State money is a prohibited source of campaign funding under Federal election law, and Patricia Madrid is not allowed to pay for what are obviously campaign mailings using state money. In 2000, FEC Chairman Daryl Wold stated that “the Commission has made clear that State governments and municipal corporations are persons under the Act and are subject to its contribution provisions.” See Advisory Opinion 2000-5, 1999-7, 1982-26, and 1977-32. See also MUR 5082 (Respondent Friends of Don Sherwood; First General Counsel’s Report states: “Although the definition of a ‘person’ in the Act exempts the federal government, ‘the Commission has not extended this exclusion to State governments or their instrumentalities’”) and MUR 5127 (Respondent Democratic Party of Illinois; First General Counsel’s Report states: “If Illinois is not a ‘person’ subject to the Act’s limits, it could potentially provide unlimited in-kind contributions to DPI. The Commission, however, has previously made clear that states are ‘persons’ and are thus subject to contribution limits). The Commission has also taken a very dim view of the use of prohibited money in federal campaigns, and has imposed significant fines. See MUR 5020 (Respondent Gormley for Senate Primary Election Fund, et al, total civil penalty of $115,000) and MUR 5573 (Respondent Westar Energy, Inc., et al, total civil penalty of $40,500).
Similarly, these mailings raise serious questions about their violation of state law as well. As reported by New Mexico’s KRQE News 13, the “Be Afraid” mailing alone cost taxpayers about $100,000 “using payouts from lawsuits brought by the Attorney General’s office.” Regarding the money, Madrid herself has made clear that it is state money: “This is not money I went to the general fund for or the Legislature for or came out of New Mexico’s taxpayer pockets. It is money that I had an option to bring these lawsuits and collect money.” See Exhibit H.
Madrid should not personally profit in her campaign from lawsuits brought by her in her role as Attorney General. Madrid’s explanation only highlights the illegality of her actions by taking money which was recovered by her office, acting as legal counsel, on behalf of the state and instead of returning this money to her client, the State of New Mexico, she then appropriated this money to the benefit of her own campaign for Congress.
Essentially Patricia Madrid is admitting that she is using monies which she collects on behalf of the State of New Mexico as her personal “slush fund.” Such activity is not only illegal and improper, it also violates the fundamental policy of campaign finance law: the avoidance of the appearance of corruption, where the source of money compromises or is the reason for a state action. Madrid’s justification -- whether to bring the actions that recovered the money for the state of New Mexico were in her discretion, and how those funds are spent is also in her discretion -- begs the question of whether she would have even brought these lawsuits if they did not provide her with a personal benefit. This raises serious legal issues as to whether she has engaged in abuse of process in proceeding or settling these cases and her ethics as a lawyer in withholding the proceeds of a recovery from her client as well as misuse of state funds. It is no different that a police officer declaring that he is entitled to a percentage of each traffic ticket he wrote, to be spent on his own self-promotion.
Therefore, since these advertisements are not legitimate informational advertisements by the state but, as described by Patricia Madrid herself, were discretionary funds spent on the sole authority of the candidate they are coordinated campaign expenditures, we urge the Commission to consider the cost of these mailings as contributions in light of McCain-Feingold limits. We respectfully ask the Commission to investigate who coordinated these mailings, whether her Congressional campaign or her personally, and issue a fine in the amount of the mailings’ cost. The Commission must not allow Madrid to violate federal law by virtue of having abused her state office.[4]
Conclusion
It is wrong for Attorney General Madrid to mask campaign propaganda as official government business regarding prevention of Internet sexual abuse. It is also illegal. Madrid deceptively abused taxpayers of well over $100,000 and effectively accepted a prohibited contribution.
In light of the above outlined violations, we respectfully request the Commission and the New Mexico Bureau of Elections: (1) investigate the Madrid campaign for further violations of applicable law; (2) impose a significant penalty against Madrid; (3) prohibit Madrid from engaging in similar unlawful conduct in the future; and (4) such other remedies as the Commission or the Bureau find appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
Marta Kramer Allen E. Weh
Executive Director Chairman
I don not appreciate this site. It is against Patricia Madrid and this is very inapropiate.
Posted by: Madison | Sunday, November 05, 2006 at 05:08 PM