New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 2, Independent Ethics Commission Amendment (2018)

Elections in New Mexico, 2018

• General election: Nov. 6
• Voter registration deadline: Oct. 9
• Early voting: Oct. 20 - Nov. 3
• Absentee voting deadline: Nov. 6

• Online registration: Yes
• Same-day registration: No
• Voter ID: No
• Poll times: 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

---

On the ballot: U.S. Senate • U.S. House • Governor • Attorney General • Secretary of State • State executive offices • State House • Supreme court • Appellate courts • Local judges • State ballot measures • Municipal • Democratic primaries • Republican primaries

New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 2
Election date November 6, 2018
Topic Government accountability
Status a Approved
Type Constitutional amendment	Origin State legislature
List of New Mexico measuresNew Mexico Constitutional Amendment 1New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 2New Mexico Bond Question ANew Mexico Bond Question BNew Mexico Bond Question CNew Mexico Bond Question DSubmit

New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 2, the Independent Ethics Commission Amendment, was on the ballot in New Mexico as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 6, 2018. The measure was approved.

A "yes" vote supported this amendment to create a seven-member state ethics commission tasked with investigating alleged violations of ethical conduct by state officials, executive and legislative employees, candidates, lobbyists, government contractors, and others as provided by law.

A "no" vote opposed this amendment to create a seven-member state ethics commission tasked with investigating alleged violations of ethical conduct by state officials, executive and legislative employees, candidates, lobbyists, government contractors, and others as provided by law.

Election results

New Mexico Amendment 2
Result		Votes	Percentage
Yes		466,029	75.18%
No		153,869	24.82%

Results are officially certified.

Source

Overview

Measure design

Amendment 2 created a seven-member state ethics commission tasked with investigating alleged violations of ethical conduct by state officials, executive and legislative employees, candidates, lobbyists, government contractors, and others. The commission was empowered to subpoena witnesses and individuals for evidence and issue advisory opinions on ethical issues and violations. Amendment 2 provided that no more than three of the seven commissioners be members of the same political party. The governor, president pro tempore of the state Senate, Senate minority leader, speaker of the state House, and House minority leader were each permitted to appoint one commissioner—for a total of five commissioners. The last two commissioners were to be appointed by the four commissioners appointed by the legislative leaders.

State ethics commissions in other states

As of January 1, 2018, New Mexico was one of seven states without a state ethics commission. The remaining 43 states had state ethics commissions, with four states providing for ethics commissions in their state constitutions. New Mexico Amendment 2 would provide for a state ethics commission in the state constitution. Neighboring Colorado, Oklahoma, and Utah all added state ethics commissions to their constitutions through ballot measures.

Text of measure

Ballot title

The ballot title was as follows:

“

Constitutional Amendment 2 Proposing an amendment to Article 5 of the Constitution of New Mexico to create an independent State Ethics Commission with jurisdiction to investigate, adjudicate and issue advisory opinions concerning civil violations of laws governing ethics, standards of conduct and reporting requirements as provided by law.

”

Ballot summary

The ballot summary was as follows:

“

Constitutional Amendment 2 would amend Article 5 of the Constitution of New Mexico by adding a new section establishing a state ethics commission. Per the amendment, the legislature would determine how the commission would initiate, receive, investigate and adjudicate complaints, and issue advisory opinions, concerning violations of standards of ethical conduct, other standards of conduct and reporting requirements. The commission would have jurisdiction as provided by law over state officers and employees of the executive and legislative branches; candidates and other participants in elections; lobbyists; and government contractors or seekers of government contracts. The legislature could also provide for other jurisdiction by law. The amendment authorizes the commission to require the attendance of witnesses or the production of records or other relevant evidence by subpoena, as provided by law, and allows the legislature to grant the commission such other powers and duties and administrative and enforcement authority of other acts as provided by law.

”

Constitutional changes

See also: Article V, New Mexico Constitution

The measure added a new section to Article V of the New Mexico Constitution. The following text was added:

Note: Hover over the text and scroll to see the full text.

A. The "state ethics commission" is established as an independent state agency under the direction of seven commissioners, no more than three of whom may be members of the same political party, whose terms and qualifications shall be as provided by law. The governor shall appoint one commissioner. One commissioner each shall be appointed by the president pro tempore of the senate, the minority floor leader of the senate, the speaker of the house of representatives and the minority floor leader of the house of representatives, all as certified by the chief clerks of the respective chambers. Two commissioners, who shall not be members of the same political party, shall be appointed by the four legislatively appointed commissioners.

B. The state ethics commission may initiate, receive, investigate and adjudicate complaints alleging violations of, and issue advisory opinions concerning, standards of ethical conduct and other standards of conduct and reporting requirements, as may be provided by law, for state officers and employees of the executive and legislative branches of government, candidates or other participants in elections, lobbyists or government contractors or seekers of government contracts and have such other jurisdiction as provided by law.

C. The state ethics commission may require the attendance of witnesses or the production of records and other evidence relevant to an investigation by subpoena as provided by law and shall have such other powers and duties and administer or enforce such other acts as further provided by law.

Readability score

See also: Ballot measure readability scores, 2018

Using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL and Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) formulas, Ballotpedia scored the readability of the ballot title and summary for this measure. Readability scores are designed to indicate the reading difficulty of text. The Flesch-Kincaid formulas account for the number of words, syllables, and sentences in a text; they do not account for the difficulty of the ideas in the text. The secretary of state wrote the ballot language for this measure. The FKGL for the ballot title is grade level 26.5, and the FRE is -17. The word count for the ballot title is 44, and the estimated reading time is 11 seconds. The FKGL for the ballot summary is grade level 20, and the FRE is 4. The word count for the ballot summary is 152, and the estimated reading time is 40 seconds. In 2018, for the 167 statewide measures on the ballot, the average ballot title or question was written at a level appropriate for those with between 19 and 20 years of U.S. formal education (graduate school-level of education), according to the FKGL formula. Read Ballotpedia's entire 2018 ballot language readability report here.

Support

Supporters

Officials

• Rep. Jim Dines (R-20)
• Rep. Daymon Ely (D-23)
• Rep. Bill McCamley (D-33)
• Rep. Nathan Small (D-36)
• Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D-36)

Organizations

• League of Women Voters of New Mexico

Arguments

The official 2018 general election voter guide, prepared by the New Mexico secretary of state, included supporting and opposing arguments. The following was the supporting argument:

“

1. Supports continued review and development of the state's ethics laws. Given that several attempts to pass legislation establishing an ethics commission have failed, voter approval of the proposed amendment could serve as a call to action to the legislature, sending a message that voters support the establishment of a state ethics commission and the continued review and development of laws governing ethics in the public sphere. 2. The national trend is to establish state ethics commissions. The vast majority of states have at least one ethics commission. The trend toward establishing ethics commissions suggests that the voters and their legislators recognize the need for them. The existence of a commission dedicated to investigating complaints alleging violation of ethical conduct could help deter ethical misconduct. 3. Establishes an ethics commission in the Constitution of New Mexico. The proposed constitutional amendment would establish an ethics commission that could only be removed in the future with another constitutional amendment approved by the voters. 4. The legislature will use the deliberative process to create the best policies for the state ethics commission. The framework of the proposed amendment allows a deliberative process through which the legislature may establish the powers of and constraints on the commission. This requires the legislature to provide by law for the functioning of the commission and its powers and duties. The proposed amendment places few restrictions on enabling legislation. The legislature would have wide latitude to use this opportunity to fill the gaps in existing law and ensure that there is a mechanism for investigation and adjudication of ethics law violations. Over time, the legislature may amend the law to implement provisions that reflect best practices. 5. The state ethics commission could be a resource for public servants and encourage ethical behavior. The commission's issuance of advisory opinions to public servants, candidates for public office, lobbyists and government contractors could improve guidance provided to those individuals and clarify the ethical rules where there may be conflicting interpretations. In turn, the guidance could assist and encourage those individuals in making ethical decisions in their professional roles. Moreover, having one agency focus on the ethical conduct of those involved in the political process and public service could result in a more consistent interpretation of the law and provide for a more efficient mechanism for enforcing the law.

”

Opposition

Arguments

The official 2018 general election voter guide, prepared by the New Mexico secretary of state, included supporting and opposing arguments. The following was the opposing argument:

“

1. A constitutional amendment is not necessary to create a state ethics commission. The Constitution of New Mexico does not prohibit enactment of a statute that would establish an independent state ethics commission, and, therefore, a constitutional amendment is not necessary to accomplish this purpose. 2. The amendment would only create a state ethics commission - the legislature still must enact laws to provide for the commission's powers and duties and the commissioners' qualifications and terms. The title of House Judiciary Committee Substitute for House Joint Resolution 8 is the only part of the proposed amendment that will appear on the ballot, and it may give the false impression that the amendment actually creates a fully functioning state ethics commission. In fact, before the commission can function, the legislature must first pass laws granting the commission all of its powers and duties, as well as setting the qualifications and terms of the commissioners. In short, voters may think that voting for the proposed amendment does far more than just create an agency that has no established statutory authority to operate or function. 3. A state ethics commission could duplicate efforts to combat unethical behavior already prohibited in law. Creating a new state ethics commission could result in duplication of effort and may be costly. Under existing law, multiple state agencies already have oversight over ethics matters affecting their respective branches of government. These include the State Personnel Office, the secretary of state, the attorney general, the Interim Legislative Ethics Committee and designated house and senate ethics committees. Broadening or amending those agencies' powers or duties to meet any unmet needs might be more efficient than creating another oversight entity. 4. Creating a new state ethics commission could be costly, and there is no guarantee that it would be more effective in deterring unethical conduct than the current system. The estimated cost of maintaining the state ethics commission is considerable. The current system has, in fact, worked in that there have been several successful prosecutions of public officers and employees for violations of various laws defining unethical conduct. The creation of three house investigative (pre-impeachment) committees and the hearings held by those committees have seemingly caused three elected officials to resign. Improvement of the current law and enforcement procedures could be accomplished without the expense of creating a whole new bureaucracy. 5. Appointment of the commissioners would be dominated by the legislature, which may undermine the independent nature of the commission. Because the legislature would select the majority of the commissioners on the state ethics commission, it may "color" the manner in which the laws are to be executed, thus ignoring the principle established in United States constitutional law that the same persons should not both legislate and administer the laws. Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1, 139 (1976). Furthermore, with six of the seven members of the commission appointed by the legislature, or appointed by commissioners who are appointed by the legislature, too much power may be consolidated in the legislative branch. Additionally, the proposed amendment assumes that the speaker of the house of representatives, the president pro tempore of the senate and the respective chambers' minority floor leaders would be evenly divided by party, but that may not necessarily be the case. Thus, questions about the independence of the commission may arise. 6. The commission's ability to exercise authority over any unethical behavior of legislators is limited by the Constitution of New Mexico. If the intent of the proposed amendment is to provide additional authority over the legislature in regard to ethics matters, the resulting enabling legislation that must be passed to give the state ethics commission its powers and duties will likely fall short of that intent. A state agency independent or not - cannot determine the qualifications of a state legislator, nor can it remove a state legislator from the legislature. Article 4, Section 7 of the Constitution of New Mexico provides that each house of the legislature shall determine the qualifications of its members, so only each respective house of the legislature can judge the eligibility of its members. Article 4, Section 11 of the Constitution of New Mexico provides the only legal authority to remove a state legislator from office, which is expulsion by the legislative body to which the legislator belongs. If the state ethics commission finds that a legislator has violated a law governing ethics, the commission could only issue an advisory opinion. The commission could not be given the authority to remove that legislator from office. To give the commission that power would violate Article 4, Sections 7 and 11 of the Constitution of New Mexico or would require a change in those constitutional sections.

”

Campaign finance

Total campaign contributions:
Support:	$0.00
Opposition:	$0.00

See also: Campaign finance requirements for New Mexico ballot measures

There were no ballot measure committees registered in support of the measure or in opposition to the measure.

Background

State ethics commissions

As of January 1, 2018, six states, including New Mexico, did not have state ethics commissions. The remaining 43 states had state ethics commissions, with four states providing for ethics commissions in their state constitutions. New Mexico Amendment 2 would provide for a state ethics commission in the state constitution.

Neighboring Colorado, Oklahoma, and Utah were three of the four states with constitutional state ethics commissions. In Colorado, the constitutional state ethics commission was created in 2006, following voter approval of Initiative 41. Oklahoma's ethics commission was created in 1990, when voters approved the initiated State Question 627. In 2010, the Utah State Legislature referred Amendment D to the ballot, which established a state ethics commission. Voters approved Amendment D.

The following map illustrates what states had ethics commissions as of January 1, 2018:

Referred amendments on the ballot

From 1996 through 2016, the state legislature referred 53 constitutional amendments to the ballot. Voters approved 45 and rejected eight of the referred amendments. Most of the amendments (51 of 53) were referred to the ballot for general elections during even-numbered election years. The average number of amendments appearing on an even-year ballot was between four and five. The approval rate at the ballot box was 84.9 percent during the 20-year period from 1996 through 2016. The rejection rate was 15.1 percent. One referred amendment was on the ballot in 2016.

Legislatively-referred constitutional amendments, 1996-2016
Years	Total number	Approved	Percent approved	Defeated	Percent defeated	Annual average	Annual median	Annual minimum	Annual maximum
Even years	51	43	84.31%	8	15.69%	4.64	5.00	1	9
Odd years	2	2	100.00%	0	0.00%	0.18	0.00	0	2
All years	52	45	84.91%	8	15.09%	2.41	1.50	0	9

Path to the ballot

See also: Amending the New Mexico Constitution

In New Mexico, both chambers of the state legislature need to approve a constitutional amendment by a simple majority during one legislative session to refer the amendment to the ballot for voter approval.

The amendment was introduced into the legislature as House Joint Resolution 8 (HJR 8). The House of Representatives approved the measure, 66 to zero, on March 9, 2017. An additional four representatives were excused or absent from the vote. On March 15, 2017, the Senate Rules Committee voted nine to one to amend HJR 8. On March 16, 2017, the Senate approved the modified amendment, with 30 senators voting in favor, nine voting against, and three excused from the vote. The House voted down the changes made to HJR 8, and the Senate voted against rescinding the changes. A joint House-Senate conference committee was established to negotiate the bill. An agreement was reached on March 17, 2017, and both the House and the Senate approved the amendment.

The 2017 legislative session ran from January 17, 2017, through March 18, 2017.

Vote in the New Mexico House of Representatives March 9, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 36  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	66	0	4
Total percent	94.29%	0.00%	5.71%
Democrat	34	0	4
Republican	32	0	0

Vote in the New Mexico State Senate March 16, 2017
Requirement: Simple majority of all members in each chamber
Number of yes votes required: 22  a
	Yes	No	Not voting
Total	30	9	3
Total percent	71.43%	21.43%	7.14%
Democrat	22	1	3
Republican	8	8	0

How to cast a vote

See also: Voting in New Mexico

Registration requirements

Check your voter registration status here.

To register to vote in New Mexico, each applicant must be a citizen of the United States, a resident of New Mexico, and at least 18 years old by the time of the next election. People convicted of a felony are eligible to vote after their prison time is completed, even if they are still on probation, parole, or another form of supervised release. Individuals who have been declared mentally incapacitated may not register to vote.

Potential New Mexico voters who were not registered automatically may use the New Mexico voter registration form, the national voter registration form, or the state's online voter registration portal to register. Completed registration materials may be mailed or delivered by hand to election officials. To register online, an applicant must have a state-issued ID. First-time applicants registering by mail must attach a valid form of identification to their registration materials, which includes a current and valid photo identification, or, a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, student identification card or other government document, including tribal IDs that show the voter's name and current address.

Automatic registration

See also: Automatic voter registration

New Mexico has automatic voter registration. Eligible voters are automatically registered to vote when they interact with a department of motor vehicles unless they opt out.

Online registration

See also: Online voter registration

New Mexico has implemented an online voter registration system. Residents can register to vote by visiting this website.

Same-day registration

See also: Same-day voter registration

New Mexico allows same-day voter registration.

Residency requirements

In New Mexico, individuals can register to vote as soon as they become residents of the state.

Verification of citizenship

See also: Laws permitting noncitizens to vote in the United States

New Mexico does not require proof of citizenship for voter registration. An individual must attest that they are a U.S. citizen when registering to vote.

All 49 states with voter registration systems require applicants to declare that they are U.S. citizens in order to register to vote in state and federal elections, under penalty of perjury or other punishment. Seven states — Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Wyoming — have laws requiring verification of citizenship at the time of voter registration, whether in effect or not. In three states — California, Maryland, and Vermont — at least one local jurisdiction allows noncitizens to vote in some local elections. Noncitizens registering to vote in those elections must complete a voter registration application provided by the local jurisdiction and are not eligible to register as state or federal voters.

Verifying your registration

The New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office allows residents to check their voter registration status online by visiting this website.

Voter ID requirements

New Mexico does not require voters to present identification while voting, in most cases. However, if an individual registered to vote for the first time by mail and did not provide verification of his or her identity then, the voter will have to show identification.

Those voters can present the following forms of identification:

• Current and valid photo identification
• Current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, student identification card, or other government document, including identification issued by an Indian nation, tribe, or pueblo that shows the voter’s name and current address

Some municipalities require identification when voting in local elections. Click here for more information.

State profile

Demographic data for New Mexico
	New Mexico	U.S.
Total population:	2,080,328	316,515,021
Land area (sq mi):	121,298	3,531,905
Race and ethnicity**
White:	73.2%	73.6%
Black/African American:	2.1%	12.6%
Asian:	1.4%	5.1%
Native American:	9.1%	0.8%
Pacific Islander:	0.1%	0.2%
Two or more:	3.3%	3%
Hispanic/Latino:	47.4%	17.1%
Education
High school graduation rate:	84.2%	86.7%
College graduation rate:	26.3%	29.8%
Income
Median household income:	$44,963	$53,889
Persons below poverty level:	24.7%	11.3%
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, "American Community Survey" (5-year estimates 2010-2015) Click here for more information on the 2020 census and here for more on its impact on the redistricting process in New Mexico. **Note: Percentages for race and ethnicity may add up to more than 100 percent because respondents may report more than one race and the Hispanic/Latino ethnicity may be selected in conjunction with any race. Read more about race and ethnicity in the census here.

Presidential voting pattern

See also: Presidential voting trends in New Mexico

New Mexico voted for the Democratic candidate in six out of the seven presidential elections between 2000 and 2024.

Pivot Counties (2016)

Ballotpedia identified 206 counties that voted for Donald Trump (R) in 2016 after voting for Barack Obama (D) in 2008 and 2012. Collectively, Trump won these Pivot Counties by more than 580,000 votes. Of these 206 counties, three are located in New Mexico, accounting for 1.46 percent of the total pivot counties.

Pivot Counties (2020)

In 2020, Ballotpedia re-examined the 206 Pivot Counties to view their voting patterns following that year's presidential election. Ballotpedia defined those won by Trump won as Retained Pivot Counties and those won by Joe Biden (D) as Boomerang Pivot Counties. Nationwide, there were 181 Retained Pivot Counties and 25 Boomerang Pivot Counties. New Mexico had three Retained Pivot Counties, 1.66 percent of all Retained Pivot Counties.

More New Mexico coverage on Ballotpedia

• Elections in New Mexico
• United States congressional delegations from New Mexico
• Public policy in New Mexico
• Endorsers in New Mexico
• New Mexico fact checks
• More...

See also

2018 measures

• 2018 ballot measures
• Government accountability on the ballot

New Mexico

• New Mexico ballot measures
• New Mexico ballot measure laws

News and analysis

• Ballot measure lawsuits
• Ballot measure readability
• Ballot measure polls

External links

• House Joint Resolution 8

Recent news

The link below is to the most recent stories in a Google news search for the terms New Mexico 2018 state ethics commission amendment. These results are automatically generated from Google. Ballotpedia does not curate or endorse these articles.

New Mexico Constitutional Amendment 2, Independent Ethics Commission Amendment (2018) - Google News