UPDATED 8/7/14 at 9:05am
New Mexico’s highest court plans a hearing later this month on a lawsuit by Democratic gubernatorial candidate Gary King in a dispute over campaign contributions.
The state Supreme Court on Wednesday scheduled an Aug. 28 hearing and issued an order blocking Secretary of State Dianna Duran from forcing King to give up $10,900 in contributions that her office says exceed state limits.
The secretary of state had directed King’s campaign to deposit the contributions in a state elections fund. Duran contends King improperly collected $10,400 from a Taos couple and $500 too much from a Santa Fe retiree after last month’s primary.
King maintains the contributions from three donors in late June were permissible because they’re to help retire his primary election debt.
*******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************
The following press release was sent to FGGAM News today:
Secretary of State Dianna Duran Files Response to King:
Disappointed that the Attorney General is playing partisan politics
in both his response and in his Press Releases
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Office of the Secretary of State
August 6, 2014
SANTA FE—Secretary of State Dianna Duran today expressed disappointment with Attorney General Gary King
issuing partisan campaign-styled press releases about the serious issue of campaign finance reporting. “I’m
very disappointed the attorney general is making such blatantly partisan remarks instead of sticking to the law
and to the issue before us,” said Duran. King’s press release called Duran several derogatory names and
accused her of all kinds of motivations just because she has asked him to come into voluntary compliance with
New Mexico’s campaign finance laws passed by the legislature.
“As Mr. King acknowledges in his court filing, our office has not even given notice of final action on this
matter,” said Duran, “the attorney general is jumping the gun and violating the legal process he, of all people,
should be familiar with.” Under the law, King is supposed to wait till notice of final action, and then—if he
disagrees—he is to submit a written request for binding arbitration. There is no provision in the law for filing a
court action, something King and his attorneys failed to read. Instead, King submitted additional information
and documents (requested by the Secretary of State) to the Supreme Court, asking that court to improperly
intervene—trying to turn the issue into a partisan political matter. “If the attorney general had followed the
procedures outlined in detail in the law, and provided information we requested, we would be in a much
better position to evaluate this matter, but he didn’t do that,” said Duran. Duran pointed out that King
provided a bank document to the Supreme Court, but never provided that information to the Secretary of
State.
Duran reiterated today that the argument being made by Gary King to the Supreme Court completely
undermines New Mexico campaign finance law—a law Gary King himself said he supported when it was
enacted in 2009. King is arguing that his campaign, and so far only his campaign, should be allowed to accept
contributions that exceed the general election limits and retroactively re-designate those contributions for
what he has now labeled “primary campaign debt,” without any limitations whatsoever. King wants the
Supreme Court to impose what he calls federal standards for his campaign, but King ignores the fact that
federal law places stringent caps on how much in personal loans can be repaid from designated contributions.
King currently claims $335,000 in primary campaign debt, all of which are loans from himself to his campaign,
and he just recently loaned himself another $200,000. Even if federal law applied to a state race, King would
not be able to re-designate funds to cover all of his primary campaign debt. While he accepted and reported
the excess contributions, King did not apply a single dime to pay the debts he claimed were the entire
motivation for the excess contribution in the first place. His attorney claimed that King’s violation is an act of
“principle” and not about the money. But keeping the money in his campaign fund, and failing to apply even
one dollar to so-called “debt reduction,” suggests that King believes it is in fact about the money.
King’s claim that he is being treated differently from any other candidate ignores the fact that his own
campaign has received more than $60,000 in general election contributions during the primary, all of which
are legal under state law, and the same kind of contributions have been received by several other statewide
candidates, and are being treated the same. Ironically, King is the only candidate asking for special treatment
by asking to short-cut the process and create a special rule for himself that goes above and beyond both state
and federal law. No other candidate has tried to claim contributions after the primary was over and claim they
are for use—as state law states—“during the primary,” when everyone knows the primary was over on June 3.