Commentary: We turn this week to the sad story of New Mexico's Secretary of State, Dianna Duran.
The case of Secretary Duran is not just a lurid story of the downfall of a public official, one who vowed to confront corruption in her state's politics only to be accused of corruption charges herself. Duran's story is also a good case to examine the question of when a public official should resign her position in the presence of criminal allegations.
This story began in late August with a surprise criminal complaint by the New Mexico Attorney General's Office. The filing by Attorney General Hector Balderas alleged that Duran had embezzled campaign funds for personal use. His office presented evidence that Duran deposited campaign donations to personal accounts and didn't report the donations. Moreover, a chart was presented that suggested a pattern of large cash transfers from campaign-related accounts to personal accounts, followed by large withdrawals from the latter made from ATM machines at casinos. In all, there were an initial 64 charges of violations in campaign finance laws, and charges of embezzlement, fraud, and money laundering.
Early this month, a 65th charge was added: identity fraud, alleging that Duran forged the signature of former State Senator Don Kidd on campaign finance reports, claiming Kidd was her campaign treasurer. Kidd denied any role in her campaigns.
The presumption of innocence is an important principle of justice. Secretary Duran, like any citizen, is innocent until proven guilty. Simple fairness suggested to some she should not surrender her job simply because of accusations of wrongdoing. Sadly, in public service fairness is not always simple or painless.
For weeks after the initial charges, Secretary Duran could not be found at her home or office. The office conducted business in her absence and eventually Duran returned to work and her office scheduled a hearing last week to propose reforms of campaign finance rules — an area in which the secretary herself is scheduled to admit to criminal charges.
The reform package was in the works before Attorney General Balderas filed the criminal complaint; and while the secretary herself would have final say, this package represents the hard work of a staff that is uninvolved in the secretary's alleged crimes. The rules deserve consideration on their own merits. They include rules requiring more disclosure of sources like labor unions and Political Action Committees so voters may know who is funding the candidates, and rules aiming at collusion between candidates and corporations to raise "dark money" and elude reporting requirements and caps on donations. The office hopes to have the new rules in place for the 2016 elections which include, of course, a presidential race. Online voter registration would also be a welcome step toward extending ease of access to the right to vote.
With Secretary Duran's surprise resignation last week, those reforms can move forward out of the shadow of Duran's legal woes, including possible impeachment proceedings.
Duran has agreed to plead guilty to six of the charges against her, including two felonies, though she retains the right to withdraw those pleas based on the sentencing decision of the judge.
Algernon D'Ammassa is Desert Sage. Write to him at DesertSageMail@gmail.com.