After several years of trying to pass a bill that would make it possible to require state public officials convicted of corruption-related crimes to forfeit part of their state pensions, Senate Republican Whip Bill Payne finally pulled it off.

The Albuquerque lawmaker's Senate Bill 197 passed the Senate unanimously last week. And Monday, the House followed suit, passing the bill 67-0.

The bill goes now to Gov. Susana Martinez, who applauded the Legislature for passing it.

Under Payne's bill, if a public official is found guilty of a corruption-related charge such as bribery or embezzlement, there would be a hearing to determine how much, if any, the official should be fined. The fine could not be greater than the value of the official's salary and benefits.

One factor that helped the bill succeed was that it was carried in the House by Democratic Leader Kenny Martinez.

Earlier in the session, Martinez was one of the major voices against a similar anti-corruption bill, House Bill 111, sponsored by Rep. Nate Gentry, R-Albuquerque. That bill passed the House, but a majority of House Democrats voted against it.

Martinez told House members that Payne's bill better defined "public officials." SB 197 defines public officials as those elected or appointed to an office covered by the Campaign Reporting Act. HB 111 included anyone receiving a state pension.

This difference appeared to satisfy the Democrats who voted against House bill.

"I felt [Gentry's] bill reached too far into the bowels of government," said Rep. Luciano "Lucky" Varela, D-Santa Fe, after Monday's vote.

House Speaker Ben Luján, D-Nambé, last week told a reporter that he voted against Gentry's bill because he feared the law could be used against acequia board members falsely accused of crimes. Luján predicted then that the Senate would send the House an anti-corruption bill that would satisfy members' concerns. "It'll pass unanimously," he said Thursday.

One difference in the two bills is that Gentry's called for the possibility of extra prison time for public officials convicted of embezzlement, bribery and other similar crimes. It also prohibited convicted public officials from becoming lobbyists or state contractors. (The Senate Public Affairs Committee amended the bill last week to remove those provisions.)

That's not the case with Payne's bill. "Sometimes you can put too many things into a bill," Payne said.

But even without those provisions, Gentry told House members that Payne's bill might be tougher than his because it allows a judge and jury to consider the offender's salary as well as his pension when determining the fine.

Gov. Martinez talked about the issue in her State of the State address. Her spokesman, Scott Darnell, said in an email Monday, "Throughout her campaign and since taking office, the governor has pushed very hard to increase penalties for corrupt public officials -- including calling on the legislature in her 'State of the State' addresses to pass a bill requiring corrupt officials to forfeit their public pensions.

"The governor believes that politicians convicted of cheating the taxpayers should not be permitted to cheat taxpayers again by receiving a taxpayer-funded pension, and she is pleased the Legislature passed this important bill today in a bipartisan manner."

By voting for Payne's bill Monday, House Democrats perhaps averted a political issue in the upcoming election. When 26 Democrats voted against Gentry's bill, the state Republican Party quickly issued a news release saying those Democrats supported "taxpayer-funded pensions to corrupt public officials."

Contact Steve Terrell at 986-3037 or sterrell@sfnewmexican.com. Read his political blog at roundhouseroundup.com.