Scandal-plagued Dem quits race after streaking, campaign cash bombshells

PIÑON POST EXCLUSIVE — New Mexico House Rep. Joseph Hernandez is already under fire after apologizing for a bizarre Chicago hotel incident involving allegations of public nudity, banging on guest doors, and police escorting him off the property.

In a stunning new development, Hernandez has withdrawn his candidacy for reelection, as has exclusively been revealed to the Piñon Post by those close with the incident, though he has not resigned from the House seat he currently holds, as of publicaton.

That move could throw Democrats into even deeper chaos.

According to the New Mexico Secretary of State’s 2026 candidate guide, the 2026 general election is set for Nov. 3. The guide says a post-primary vacancy on the general election ballot may be filled only if the vacancy occurs 90 or more days before the general election, which the SOS identifies as on or before Aug. 5, 2026. The same guide lists Aug. 25, 2026, as the last day candidates can withdraw from the general election and the last day to nominate a candidate to fill a post-primary vacancy on the general ballot.

State law likewise says a qualified party may fill a vacancy only if it occurs after the primary but “ninety or more days before the general election,” and that appointments to fill vacancies must be filed on or before the 70th day before the general election.

That means if Hernandez’s withdrawal came after the Aug. 5 vacancy window, Democrats may be unable to simply replace him on the ballot, even if party insiders scramble to name someone else. If his withdrawal paperwork was not timely or legally effective, his name could remain a major problem for Democrats heading into November.

Either way, the timing is disastrous.

Hernandez is not resigning from office, meaning the scandal-plagued Democrat may continue serving in the Legislature even as his campaign collapses under the weight of an alcohol-related hotel scandal, unanswered campaign finance questions, and mounting calls for transparency.

Now, the Shiprock Democrat’s campaign finance reports are raising a new set of questions about his judgment, transparency, and use of donor money. Recent reports especially raise the appearance that his campaign account was being used less like a political campaign account and more like a personal spending account.

An extensive Piñon Post review of Hernandez’s campaign filings found more than $101,700 in reported expenditures across the reports reviewed, including thousands of dollars in restaurants, fast food, grocery stores, gas stations, hotels, cash-style withdrawals, payments to himself, pawn-shop-linked charges categorized as travel and meals, and expenses that appear to overlap with official legislative travel.

The findings come just days after Hernandez admitted he is seeking help for “challenges with alcohol” following the Chicago scandal.

“I want to sincerely apologize to my family and my community for my behavior during a recent stay in Chicago,” Hernandez wrote in a public Facebook statement. “My conduct was not reflective of my role as a state representative or my duty to you — my constituents, and I accept full responsibility for my actions.”

He added that he is “seeking professional help” to address “my challenges with alcohol that ultimately led to this regretful lapse in judgement.”

The Albuquerque Journal reported that a Chicago police incident report and two eyewitnesses alleged Hernandez was naked, running around the 17th floor of the Holiday Inn at Wolf Point, and “banging on other guests’ doors” before police were called. The Journal also reported that both eyewitnesses said Hernandez had “passed out” on a hotel lobby couch on a previous night of the same stay, leading to an earlier encounter with security.

Before those details became public, Hernandez had described the episode only as a “negative experience” with hotel security and police.

His campaign reports now tell another story: one of messy records, staggering spending, and unresolved questions.

New Mexico law allows campaign money to be used for campaign expenses and certain legislator expenses reasonably related to official duties, but it expressly excludes “personal and legislative session living expenses.” State regulations also say campaign spending must be reasonably attributable to the campaign and not to personal use or personal living expenses.

That makes several of Hernandez’s reported expenses stand out.

One of the most glaring issues is money paid directly to Hernandez himself.

Piñon Post identified at least $4,073 in payments, cash withdrawals, ATM transactions, over-the-counter bank transactions, or debit-card entries tied directly to Joseph Hernandez himself, with limited detail in the public filings. The filings identify only $267 as explicitly labeled ATM withdrawals, but the broader cash-style and self-directed transactions tied to Hernandez total at least $4,073.

These were not cleanly explained reimbursements in the public filings. Many were labeled with vague categories such as “fundraising events,” “candidate travel, lodging, and meals,” “meetings and appearances,” or “campaign paraphernalia/misc.”

One report shows $1,200 in “Cash Out” to Joseph Hernandez for “fundraising events” on June 5, 2024, another $5 cash-out to Hernandez the same day, and a separate $540 cash-out to Hernandez on June 7, 2024, for “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” The same report also includes a $2,500 transaction to “DDA Citizen Bank” marked “00-No Category Applies,” along with multiple Speedway gift-card purchases described as compensation for workers.

A later 2026 report shows more self-directed transactions: $164 to Hernandez as an “ATM Withdrawal” for “meetings and appearances,” $450 to Hernandez through “DDA CK” for “candidate travel, lodging, and meals,” $1,200 to Hernandez through “DDK Over the Counter” for “candidate travel, lodging, and meals,” $120 to Hernandez through “Debit Withdrawal” for “fundraising events,” $103 to Hernandez through “ATM Debit DDAT4” for “candidate travel, lodging, and meals,” and another $120 to Hernandez through “CK OTC DDA CK” for “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.”

Campaign reimbursements can be legitimate if they are documented, campaign-related, and properly reported. But Hernandez’s filings provide little public detail about what was purchased, who ultimately received the money, whether receipts exist, or whether the spending overlapped with taxpayer-funded legislative per diem or mileage.

That matters because the reports also show major official-travel overlap questions.

Hernandez’s official legislative profile lists him as a member of the Indian Affairs Committee and Water and Natural Resources Committee, and as an advisory member of the Legislative Finance Committee. The 2026 interim calendar shows the Legislative Finance Committee met in Ruidoso from June 15 through June 18, while the Indian Affairs Committee met in Ruidoso from June 23 through June 25.

Legislators serving on interim committee business are eligible for per diem and mileage reimbursement for official travel.

Yet Hernandez’s campaign filings show a string of Ruidoso and Mescalero-area charges in the same general period.

On June 22, 2026, Hernandez’s campaign reported $409.47 at Inn of the Mountain Gods in Mescalero as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” The same day, the campaign also reported $11.73 at Sbarro Pizza at the same Carrizo Canyon Road address. Nearby entries include charges at Allsup’s, Domino’s, Nataani Nez Restaurant, and other travel or food-related merchants.

The report also lists a $126.23 charge at The Ranchers in Ruidoso on June 26 as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” The Ranchers is a steakhouse-style restaurant whose menu includes items such as ribeye, filet of beef, butter lobster pasta, elk tenderloin, desserts, burgers, seafood, and other higher-dollar dinner options.

If Hernandez was traveling for interim committee business, was he receiving taxpayer-funded per diem or mileage while his campaign also paid for meals, hotels, gas, restaurants, or cash withdrawals? 

The same concern applies to regular session.

The 2026 regular session ran from Jan. 20 to Feb. 19. Hernandez’s campaign report includes a Feb. 2, 2026, Sage Hotel charge in Santa Fe for $89.87, categorized as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” Because state law excludes “legislative session living expenses” from permissible campaign spending, that Santa Fe hotel charge raises a direct question: why was a hotel bill during the regular session charged to the campaign account, and was it ever reimbursed?

The spending categories get even stranger with Circle W.

Hernandez’s campaign reports repeatedly list “Circle W” at 3316 US-64 in Waterflow as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals” or campaign-related spending. But a Google search record provided to Piñon Post identifies the same address as Circle W Pawn, Circle W Pawn & Trading, and a pawn/firearms-related business.

The filings show repeated Circle W charges, including $74, $19.17, $38.34, $40, $25.65, $45.54, $50, $34.14, and $166.56 in various categories. Several were labeled as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” These total $493.40.

Why were pawn-shop-linked charges reported as meals and travel?

The gas station and convenience-store spending is also staggering.

Piñon Post identified roughly $5,657.26 at gas stations and convenience stores, excluding Circle W. The reports list repeated spending at Speedway, Warrior, Pilot, Sinclair, Maverik, Allsup’s, 7-2-11/7211, Red Mesa Express, Shiprock Quickstop, Kewa Gas, Stronghold, Marathon, Sky City Travel Center, Four Winds Convenience Store, Polar Station, Bodes Store, and Teec Nos Pos Trading Post.

Some days show multiple gas station or convenience-store stops.

On June 2, 2026, the campaign reported $64.76 at Shiprock Quickstop, followed by three separate Sinclair charges for $7.29, $13.37, and $74, all categorized as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.” The same page also includes $40 at Taco Bell and a massive $772.94 Walmart Supercenter charge for “meetings and appearances.”

On June 3, the campaign reported $52 at Domino’s Pizza, a DDA cash-withdrawal bank fee tied to Hernandez, $20.48 at McDonald’s, two Red Mesa Express charges, Speedway Kirtland, and Speedway in Waterflow — again largely categorized as “candidate travel, lodging, and meals.”

Multiple same-day stops raise obvious questions, especially without receipts. After Hernandez publicly admitted alcohol-related challenges that he says he is getting professional help to address, the lack of itemized receipts becomes a major transparency problem.

The reports do not include receipts showing what was purchased at gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, or grocery stores. Without receipts, voters cannot rule out personal purchases — including alcohol — at the very moment Hernandez is publicly admitting alcohol-related challenges. Voters and donors cannot tell whether those charges were for gasoline, snacks, gift cards, personal items, alcohol, or something else entirely.

After an alcohol-fueled public scandal, New Mexico donors should not have to guess.

The grocery, wholesale, and big-box spending is even larger.

Piñon Post’s line-item review found roughly $18,359.23 in spending at grocery, wholesale, big-box, and dollar-store merchants. That includes more than $10,200 combined at Sam’s Club and Sam’s Club, roughly $2,677.62 at Bashas’, roughly $1,753.27 at Walmart Supercenter, and spending at Smith’s Grocery, Costco, Dollar General, Dollar Tree, Family Dollar, Safeway, Southwest Cash and Carry/Shamrock Food Service, NAPI Region 2, Valley Trading Post, and Big R of Farmington. 

In one Dollar General run on June 1, 2026, Hernandez spent a whopping  $470.36 — at a dollar store.

One report shows $1,237.43 at Sam’s Club for fundraising events, followed by additional large Sam’s Club, Walmart, Home Depot, Porter’s Restaurant, and other charges. Another shows the 2026 $772.94 Walmart Supercenter charge for “meetings and appearances.”

The volume of grocery and wholesale spending here is enormous, especially when combined with cash withdrawals, gas station runs, hotel stays, restaurant bills, and late filings.

The restaurant and fast-food spending is just as hard to miss.

Hernandez’s filings show roughly $7,758.72 at restaurants and fast-food establishments, including McDonald’s, Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC), Taco Bell, Domino’s, Pizza Hut, Little Caesars, Wendy’s, Church’s Chicken, Dunkin Donuts, Blake’s Lotaburger, Dairy Queen, Sonic, Wingstop, Olive Garden, Red Lobster, Nataani Nez Restaurant, Denny’s, The Coffee Ship, The Ranchers, Sizzler, Porter’s Restaurant, Los Hermanitos, Chef Bernie’s, Captain D’s, Sumo Asian Grill, Roadside Restaurant, Expresso Lane Coffee, Yin Yang Chinese, Wahlburger, Sbarro Pizza, and others.

These food-related expenses are especially eyebrow-raising, with an almost incomprehensible amount of food bought at a single time, such as two separate expenses from KFC for $67.90 and $71.93 on the same day, June 2, 2026. Many of these expenses are in Shiprock, where Hernandez resides, raising even more questions. The reports also show a $52 Domino’s charge, McDonald’s, Red Mesa Express, and Speedway charges the very next day.

The reports show a constant drumbeat of food charges categorized as campaign travel, meetings and appearances, fundraising events, candidate meals, or staff/spouse travel.

The campaign also reported spending on gift cards.

A March 2026-filed report includes multiple Speedway entries described as purchases to compensate workers or volunteers with gift cards, including $405, $444.75, $624.75, and $249.90. That totals more than $1,700 in gift-card-style compensation.

That raises still more questions: who received the gift cards, were the recipients documented, and were the payments properly disclosed?

Then there is the bookkeeping mess.

In a Fourth Primary Report filed March 10, 2026, Hernandez reported a $9,074.35 contribution from himself with the explanation: “Placeholder to bring balance above negative until audit can rectify negative reported balance.” The same section showed multiple deleted “Unknown Contributor” cash entries, including $1,470.80, $2,833.38, $1,311.60, and $250.

That is not a normal-looking disclosure.

A campaign needing a $9,074.35 “placeholder” to fix a negative balance until an audit can “rectify” the books is exactly the kind of entry that should alarm voters, donors, and ethics officials.

Late filings deepen the concern.

Hernandez’s First General Report was due Sept. 9, 2024, but was filed March 9, 2026. That same report listed a negative opening balance of $369.61. His First Primary Report was due April 8, 2024, but was filed Oct. 21, 2025. His Fourth Primary Report was due July 5, 2024, but was filed March 10, 2026. His Fourth General Report was due Jan. 7, 2025, but was filed March 9, 2026. His First Bi-Annual Report was due April 14, 2025, but was filed March 9, 2026. His Second Bi-Annual Report was due Oct. 13, 2025, but was filed March 9, 2026.

Some of those reports were more than a year late.

Campaign finance disclosure is supposed to let voters see how candidates raise and spend money before they vote — not years later, after the money is spent and the reports are packed with vague categories, cash withdrawals, and unexplained transactions.

The source of Hernandez’s campaign money also deserves attention.

His reports show large contributions from unions, PACs, Democrat politicians, and special interests. The filings include $5,000 from AFSCME, $5,000 from the New Mexico Health Care Association, $4,500 from the Jan Fonda PAC, $3,500 from IBEW PAC Volunteer Fund, $1,500 from the Committee to Elect Javier Martinez, $1,500 from Javier Martinez (the House speaker), $1,500 from CVNM Action Fund, and $1,000 from Reena for New Mexico (the House majority leader), among others.

Those donors have a right to know whether their money paid for real campaign work — or whether it flowed through a campaign account filled with restaurants, groceries, gas stations, hotels, cash withdrawals, self-payments, pawn-shop-linked charges, late filings, and bookkeeping irregularities.

The reports show a pattern of red flags that could have voters requesting receipts, reimbursement records, and answers.

Why did Hernandez’s campaign pay a Santa Fe hotel charge during the legislative session?

Why were Ruidoso and Mescalero travel expenses paid by the campaign during a period that overlapped with interim committee meetings where taxpayer-funded per diem and mileage may have been available?

Why were repeated Circle W charges at a pawn-shop-linked address categorized as travel, lodging, and meals?

Why did the campaign report thousands of dollars in self-payments, ATM withdrawals, cash-outs, and over-the-counter transactions tied to Hernandez himself?

Why did one report need a $9,074.35 “placeholder” contribution to fix a negative balance?

Why were so many reports filed months — and in some cases more than a year — late?

And after Hernandez admitted alcohol-related challenges following the Chicago hotel scandal, why should voters accept vague, unitemized charges at gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, and grocery stores without seeing the receipts?

Hernandez first told the public his Chicago episode was just a “negative experience” with hotel security.

Then the police report and witnesses told a much stranger story.

Now his campaign reports are telling another one — a story of staggering spending, self-payments, vague categories, late disclosures, and financial red flags.

Hernandez says he wants to regain the public’s trust.

A good place to start would be showing voters exactly where the money went.

Now Democrats may have a ballot crisis on their hands.

Hernandez’s reported withdrawal does not erase the questions raised by his campaign reports, nor does it remove him from office. It simply adds another layer to the fallout: a sitting Democrat lawmaker engulfed in scandal, a campaign finance paper trail demanding answers, and a party that may have waited too long to replace him.

Since Democrats cannot legally substitute a nominee because they have passed the 90-day window for withdrawal and the 70-day window for appointment, House District 4 voters will be left with a race scrambled by Hernandez’s own conduct and his party’s failure to act before the statutory deadline.

Republican House District 4 candidate Heather Ellison previously called on Hernandez to be transparent after the Chicago hotel incident, saying, “Legislators are held to a certain ethical standard, and they have a responsibility to be transparent, especially when spending taxpayer dollars. This incident is certainly concerning, and I call upon Representative Hernandez to tell the truth and take accountability for what happened.” Piñon Post has requested additional comment from Ellison regarding the campaign finance findings.

Hernandez was contacted for comment through his campaign and official legislative email addresses, but did not respond before publication.