ethics

Lawsuit accuses Bregman’s campaign manager of shady spending scheme

25 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A new civil lawsuit from the New Mexico State Ethics Commission is shedding an unflattering light on a left-wing “dark money” group closely tied to Democrat leadership, raising serious questions about transparency and legal compliance in the state’s political landscape.

The group, New Mexico Safety Over Profit (NMSOP), stands accused of failing to report more than $56,000 spent lobbying against a critical medical malpractice reform bill. The Ethics Commission alleges NMSOP violated the Lobbyist Regulation Act and Campaign Reporting Act by omitting the campaign from their required post-session disclosures.

What makes this case especially telling is the political connection: NMSOP’s executive director, Jon Lipschutz, just happens to be managing anti-gun Democrat gubernatorial candidate Sam Bregman’s campaign. Bregman, who currently serves as the 2nd Judicial District Attorney, did not respond to requests for comment Monday morning.

Originally formed under the more benign-sounding name Fairness for New Mexico Patients, NMSOP is registered as a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, meaning it’s not legally required to disclose its donors under federal law. These types of groups, often used by the left to shield major funders from public scrutiny, are commonly referred to as dark money organizations.

Despite their federal tax status, NMSOP is still obligated to comply with New Mexico’s campaign finance laws—a fact the Ethics Commission emphasized in its June 10 civil complaint filed in state court. According to the commission, the organization did report some of its political spending during the 2025 legislative session, but conspicuously omitted reporting an aggressive advertising campaign aimed at derailing medical malpractice reform.

Those ads reportedly included placements in the Albuquerque Journal and Santa Fe New Mexican, as well as a staggering $56,000 worth of political ads on Facebook. The commission is seeking a court order to compel NMSOP to fully disclose its 2024 financial activities, including revealing the names and occupations of donors to the campaign, and to impose a penalty of $5,000.

Lipschutz dismissed the lawsuit as a “distraction” and claimed his group is confident it followed the law. He pivoted to attacking out-of-state hospitals and insurance companies, saying it was “telling” that the Ethics Commission had chosen to “single out the one organization fighting to protect patients.”

But the Ethics Commission wasn’t buying that deflection. Executive Director Jeremy Farris made clear the issue is about transparency and accountability. “NMSOP has publicly stated that transparency and accountability are core to its mission, yet it refuses to comply with basic disclosure obligations,” he said. “This lawsuit is about ensuring that all organizations advocating for legislative change follow the same legal standard.”

While Democrats in New Mexico and nationwide rail against so-called “dark money” when it suits their agenda, this case shows how willing they are to embrace opaque and potentially unlawful methods when the political ends justify the means. Voters should ask themselves: If Democrats can’t be trusted to follow basic campaign finance laws now, how can they be trusted to lead the state?

Lawsuit accuses Bregman’s campaign manager of shady spending scheme Read More »

NM legislator’s past conflicts of interest contradict current ethics rhetoric

3 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico State Rep. Micaela Lara Cadena, D-Mesilla, recently took a strong stance in favor of what is being billed as a transparency in lobbying bill, passionately advocating for H.B. 143, a measure aimed at shining a brighter light on lobbying activities at the Roundhouse. However, her own record raises serious questions about whether her push for transparency is genuine—or just political grandstanding.

During a recent Senate Rules Committee hearing, Cadena lamented that legislative decisions in New Mexico do not always happen “in light and in transparency,” according to a Santa Fe New Mexican report. 

She pointedly referenced an instance where two committee members voted on a bill despite having direct financial interests in its outcome. 

“Just today in our tax committee, we voted on a bill where two members of the committee who have direct financial interest in the piece of legislation we are considering took votes,” she said, adding, “I think an incredible amendment to this bill would be that us as members of the body, if we had a spouse or ourselves had a financial interest in the legislation we are considering, would have to at least disclose that since recusal is not something our body is used to or seems to practice.”

Yet, just a few years ago, Cadena herself was seen in a bout of blatant conflicts of interest, actively participating in legislation that directly benefited the organization she worked for—without recusing herself.

Cadena’s Own Ethical Questions

Cadena, while serving her first term in the New Mexico House, was also employed as the Research Director for Young Women United (YWU), an organization that aggressively lobbies for expanded abortion access, as reported by our predecessor site, JohnForNM.com in 2019 

YWU was a key player in the push for that year’s House Bill 51, which sought to expand abortion rights in the state. Not only was Cadena personally involved with YWU’s legislative agenda, but her direct association with the group was evident—her name and photo were even featured on the Respect New Mexico Women coalition’s website, an advocacy group tied to YWU.

Under the New Mexico Legislative Ethics Guide, legislators are expected to recuse themselves from voting on bills where they or their organizations have a direct interest. Despite this clear ethical guideline, Cadena actively participated in discussions and votes that directly benefited her employer, violating the very principles of transparency and accountability she now claims to champion.

Double Standards on Lobbying and Influence

Cadena’s recent statements in favor of 2025’s HB 143 come across as hollow in light of her past actions. She has expressed concerns about legislators voting on bills where they have personal financial interests, yet she saw no issue with doing the same when it suited her political and professional objectives. 

This raises a fundamental question: Is Cadena truly committed to ethics reform, or is she simply using the issue as a tool to target political opponents while ignoring her own potential transgressions?

Moreover, her recent push for greater disclosure in lobbying lacks credibility when considering her history of working for a lobbying organization while simultaneously serving as a lawmaker. The very transparency measures she now supports would have, in theory, required her to disclose her connections to YWU more openly—something she conveniently avoided when it would have affected her own career.

Political Opportunism Over Genuine Reform

Cadena’s inconsistency on ethics and transparency demonstrates the kind of political opportunism that frustrates voters. While she is quick to call for others to be held accountable, she has shown little regard for the rules when they apply to her. Her actions highlight the hypocrisy that often plagues politics, where lawmakers demand accountability from others while conveniently ignoring their own conflicts of interest.

If Cadena truly believes in transparency and ethics, she should start by acknowledging her past violations and committing to holding herself to the same standard she seeks to impose on others. Until then, her advocacy for HB 143 rings hollow, serving more as a political maneuver than a genuine commitment to reform.

NM legislator’s past conflicts of interest contradict current ethics rhetoric Read More »

Heinrich slapped with ethics watchdog request over campaign methods

10 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), an ethics watchdog group, has requested that the Senate Select Committee on Ethics investigate New Mexico U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich. FACT’s concerns center around allegations that Heinrich intertwined official legislative actions with campaign fundraising efforts.

In a detailed letter, FACT’s Executive Director, Kendra Arnold, pointed out to the committee chairs, Senators Chris Coons and James Lankford, that Heinrich’s campaign emails may have violated Senate ethics rules. These emails reportedly invited recipients to “co-sponsor” legislation by making donations to his campaign, suggesting donation amounts ranging from $10 to $1,000.

Arnold expressed concern over this practice, stating, “Federal law and Senate ethics rules do not allow senators to fundraise based upon their official duties, in part because it would lead to the public rightfully question whether the senator’s primary concern was their political campaign.” She highlighted the potential conflict this creates, as it may give the impression that legislative actions can be influenced by campaign contributions.

One specific email cited by FACT was sent on behalf of Heinrich’s principal campaign committee on March 18, promoting the First-Time Homebuyer Tax Credit Act. The email asked recipients to sign a petition supporting the legislation, which led to a page soliciting campaign donations. Similarly, another campaign email dated April 10 discussed the Infant Formula Made in America Act, also directing supporters to a donation page after prompting them to endorse the legislation.

These instances, Arnold argues, blur the lines between official duties and campaign activities, which could undermine public trust and violate ethical standards designed to maintain a clear separation between the two.

As of now, the Senate Ethics Committee has not publicly responded to FACT’s request for investigation. Heinrich, who has held his Senate seat since 2013 and is up for reelection in a district considered solidly Democratic, has also not commented on the allegations. His office and campaign were reached out to for responses by The Washington Times.

Heinrich slapped with ethics watchdog request over campaign methods Read More »

Scroll to Top