CD 1 discussion turns into attack on lead candidates

Yesterday evening was the third Thursday monthly meeting for the Democratic Party of Bernalillo County. The first order of business was voter registration training.

Then came the surprise of the evening a forum with the congressional one candidates. Michelle L. Grisham, Martin Heinrich, and Robert Pidcock all showed up for the debate on issues that affect the area of Bernalillo County. Rebecca Vigil-Giron was missing from the event. Many of the members were not in the room because they were getting training in how to register voters.

The forum started out with each of the candidates giving an introduction of who they were and why they were in the race. But that was when things took a turn for the worst. Robert L. Pidcock a local lawyer who has never ran for office and has a habit of looking more at his feet then at the voters right in front of him came out with a surprise attack on the two lead candidates in the race. He accused both Michelle L. Grisham and Martin Heinrich of taking PAC money and selling out to special interest groups. The whole room was stunned by the angry attack on our lead candidates. Michelle looked in shock by the attack on her taking of $10,000 in PAC money. Martin Heinrich appeared to stay calm and well composed during the attack. Pidcock pointed out that Heinrich had taken $76,000 for PAC money.

Because the format of the forum was a question with one minute answers none of the candidates were allowed a rebuttal answer until another question came up with that topic.

The question that finally resulted in a rebuttal was the one on shielding candidates from special interest by campaign finance reform. Martin Heinrich stated that his father was a union member during his childhood and that most of the PAC money he had received was from unions that represented blue collar workers and their families. It was clear that Heinrich felt a kinship with these workers and has tried in his adult life to support issues that he felt would help middle class and blue collar workers and their families to get ahead. Michelle stayed quiet on the matter and appeared not to have a reply to the attack. It may have just been such a total surprise that she needed time to think of a good response to that kind of mean spirited attack. This will be a learning experience for her because the republicans will not hesitate to launch those types of attacks during the general election.

The debate:

Question 1

All of the candidates went on to answer the first question that was on water rights in the Southwest.

Robert Pidcock favored enforcement of current water laws and could not come up with any new ideas on the subject.

Martin Heinrich who has worked on the city water board appeared more knowledgeable about the subject and was in favor of controlled growth with a solid planning program for future water usage.

Michelle L. Grisham was in favor of planed water usage and did not have anything new to add to the topic.

Question 2

Dealt with how best to deal with health care and the drug companies?

Robert Pidcock suggested negotiating with the drug companies to get a better deal which would result in lower cost to the consumer.

Martin Heinrich wanted to first deal with making sure our children were taken care of by passing a solid program to cover them first. Then fix Medicare by forcing drug companies to negotiate better prices for their products. Heinrich also wanted to allow people who were close to the age limit to buy into the Medicare program to further reduce the cost of drugs.

Michelle L. Grisham wanted to come up with a program that closely resembled the V.A. system.

Question 3

The question was on funding of charter schools with public funds that would take away from public schools?

Robert Pidcock felt that it was robbing funding from the public school system and he did not support that type of funding but saw no way for the federal government to have any control over local issues.

Martin Heinrich dose not support the practice of using public funding to support charter schools. He felt that the best way to improve the public school systems was by doing away completely with the "No Child Left Behind" Act and then working to find ways to encourage true reform of our public school system. He pointed out that he has two your sons of his own and cares greatly about the future of the public education system.

Michelle L. Grisham simply favored full funding of public education.

Question 4

How should we best carry out Immigration reform in the U.S.?

Martin Heinrich was proud of New Mexico's handling of immigration as a border state. He was in favor of enforcement of current laws for employers of immigrates. He did feel that they should be more strictly enforced.

Michelle L. Grisham felt that we needed a clear policy for immigration. One that was "fair" and "firm." She appeared to not understand that a good many of the illegal immigrates in this country do pay their taxes.

Robert Pidcock is in favor of rising the limits on how many Mexican can immigrate to this country legally. He also favors enforcement of current laws about employing illegal immigrates.

Question 5

How can we shield candidate from special interest and large donors?

Michelle L. Grisham felt that the behavior was unfair and not productive.

Martin Heinrich has leaded the city council in campaign finance reform and supports it completely. He would love to see national reforms on campaign financing.

Robert Pidcock once again repeated his attack on the lead candidates and said that he is in favor of campaign reform and would not take a dime of PAC money.

Question 6

The question was do you support organized labor?

Martin Heinrich said that his father was a union member and that he clearly saw the benefit of organized labor. He said that his mother worked in non union jobs and that because of it she was not treated as well as his father. Martin has been endorsed by 13 unions in the state.

Michelle L Grisham said that she has always support unions.

Robert Pidcock was upset that only one union had contacted him before they endorsed Heinrich. He point out that he had sued one union on behave of a member who thought he was being mistreated by his local. What Mr. Pidcock does not understand as a first time candidate is that it is up to the candidates to contract local unions for their endorsement.

Question 7

Portability of employee benefits such as health care?

Michelle L. Grisham wanted to increase it.

Robert Pidcock favors universal health care as the answer.

Martin Heinrich favors universal health care that could then go with the employee.

Question 8

What are your opponent weaknesses?

Robert Pidcock said that he would not personally attack any of the other candidates but did stop to point out that both of his opponents had taking PAC money. He said he wished to only point out differences on issues.

Martin Heinrich took the high road by saying that his opponent was Darren White and that he would not attack another democrat.

Michelle L. Grisham agreed with her opponents views and would no rise to the bait.

Question 9

Where do you stand on the party platform?

Martin Heinrich saw the platform as a way to inform candidates about which issues were important to party members.

Michelle L. Grisham point out that she strongly supported the platform statements on the death penalty.

Robert Pidcock said that the party requires candidates to support the platform. He also wanted to point out that the only time he supports the death penalty is in cases where the defendant has been convicted of serial murder.

Closing

Michelle L. Grisham point out that she saw her relationship with the voters as a partnership.

Robert L. Pidcock pointed out that he has been a lawyer for the last 18 years and has a history of military service.

Martin Heinrich is a big supporter of change in government. He pointed out that he has a strong record of supporting middle and lower income families. He wants to help lead a reform in our government that will move us in a new direction in Washington.

End Remarks:

Martin Heinrich was the clear winner of last evening's debate. He was well informed on the issues raised and had well thought out answers. Robert Pidcock came off as angry and unknowledgeable about how to go about getting elected. One suggestion would be for him to start out at a local election and then work his way up to a state district election. It is very difficult for some individuals to learn on the state district stage. He clearly needs help with public image development. Michelle L. Grisham needed to do her homework on basic issues. While she does have some good answers she clearly needed to prepare more for such a debate. Some of her answers were too soft and undefined. The individual that goes up against Darren White can not afford to be unprepared because Mr. White will be well trained and completely prepared to go on the attack from word one.