Ramona Goolsby, the Republican nominee for New Mexico secretary of state, has spent much of the past four years questioning the election system she hopes to oversee.
Goolsby served as the librarian for the New Mexico Election Transparency Network, a group that has advocated for tighter restrictions on voting. From 2022-24, Goolsby and other members of that group were regular speakers at Sandoval County Commission meetings, using the public comment period to cast doubt on New Mexico’s election system — criticizing the county’s use of ballot drop boxes, calling for voter ID, and demanding the resignation of the county clerk.
Goolsby has repeatedly decried what she describes as a lack of transparency in state government surrounding elections. She’s also raised questions about alleged security flaws with voting machines, voiced concerns about voting by undocumented immigrants and said there are hundreds of thousands of errors on New Mexico’s voter rolls.
She has filed seven lawsuits and petitions against Maggie Toulouse Oliver, the current secretary of state, according to court documents. Toulouse Oliver declined to comment on those filings or on Goolsby’s allegations about the state’s election system.
Since moving to New Mexico from Oklahoma in 2019, Goolsby has worked alongside several firebrand election deniers, including Erin and David Clements. The Clements were prominent proponents of debunked election conspiracy theories who traveled the country urging local governments to reject the 2020 election results. They published a widely discredited report concluding that “systemic election fraud occurred in every New Mexico county,” and were investigated by the House Oversight Committee.
Goolsby raises her concerns about the election system in a far more measured and cordial tone than some of her associates. She has told reporters the 2020 election was not stolen or rigged. The risks she sees in the state’s election process are substantial nonetheless.
The following interview with Ramona Goolsby was edited for brevity and clarity:
Searchlight: The lawsuits and petitions you’ve filed against the current secretary of state allege widespread problems with her oversight of elections. What were you trying to accomplish with those legal actions?
Goolsby: I would explain those efforts as putting sunshine on processes, shining light. It’s not always easy to get information from our government. So, when we don’t get answers, and inspection of public records [requests] aren’t answered, that is the next resource that citizens have.
Searchlight: You highlight several of those legal cases on your campaign website, including your petition for a writ of mandamus to obtain 2022 election ballots. Why did you want to get the ballots in that election?
Goolsby: That particular lawsuit came about because of a hand recount, an official hand recount that was done in Torrance County. The recount showed there were discrepancies that were never really completely identified. We have paper ballots, and we wanted to see them — if you have paper ballots available, and the public wants to see them, then they should be allowed to see them. They’re not marked as far as who voted what, but it’s a verification, and that’s what I believe in. Because then it puts all of the questions to rest.
Searchlight: You say there were discrepancies. What did those discrepancies look like?
Goolsby: The total ballots that came up with their count — and mind you, it was an unofficial count — didn’t match what was reported to the Secretary of State’s Office.
Searchlight: What do you think was going on there?
Goolsby: I don’t know. And so when you don’t know something, you ask questions, right?
Searchlight: There’s another, separate petition that you filed, saying that New Mexico’s Dominion voting machines disenfranchised you and took away your right to suffrage. Tell me about that.
Goolsby: That had to do with the fact that machines were not certified according to state statute in 2022. If you read the law, it says that all machines are to be certified to approved VVSG [Voluntary Voting System Guidelines] standards, and the machines were only certified to the standards in 2011. We all know that computers can experience issues as they age, and they’re not as secure as they should be when you don’t upgrade and keep things up to standard. The newest standards have a lot of cybersecurity protocols and checks, which the old standard did not.
Searchlight: The current secretary of state says the machines have been properly certified and they have followed the legal standards and timelines.
Goolsby: I can disagree with that, too. The statute was changed to, I think it’s “standards that are approved and implemented.” The problem at the time was that the standards had been approved, the new standards, but they didn’t have labs that were able to certify to the new standards, and so they added new language to cover.
Searchlight: The courts have dismissed or denied all of your cases, except the one that is currently pending. What do you make of the fact that judges are tossing out all of your legal actions?
Goolsby: None of those have been decided on merit. It’s been technicalities, and sometimes they’ve been dismissed without prejudice, so I’ve reserved the right to take them up again. There was one case about an IPRA request — my court complaint was against the records custodian. Well, Sandoval County says, “Oh no, we changed that. You have to sue the county manager. So, you know, it’s just different things like that. It’s never been on merit.
I am just trying to review the vulnerabilities in the process and let that be known. And I think that will give people a lot more confidence.
Searchlight: But what’s the underlying concern here? Do you think nefarious players are trying to get into the voting machines, that someone would try to manipulate vote counts?
Goolsby: My concern is that processes aren’t necessarily followed all of the time, and plus the cybersecurity. We know during that time, one of the largest cyber hacks in history was done [the Solar Winds breach, which was identified in 2020 and impacted private companies and government agencies]. That same year, they had to get orders from district courts in many counties to open the ballot boxes because there were errors.
You know, it all kind of adds up. We had a problem in Torrance. And in 2022, some of the emails to the clerks from the Secretary of State’s Office did advise them that their numbers were not correct and to change them.
Searchlight: But do you think there has ever been any actual manipulation of the vote, anything that affected an outcome?
Goolsby: I don’t know, and the reason I don’t know is because I have not been allowed to verify information. I am just trying to review the vulnerabilities in the process and let that be known. And I think that will give people a lot more confidence if they didn’t have those questions.
Searchlight: We already have a secure system and there’s no evidence of anyone ever tampering with the vote or any outcomes being affected. So, critics would say that this kind of constant questioning of the process is what actually undermines confidence in our elections.
Goolsby: I disagree with that. I think that when you answer questions, it gives people confidence. When you have a county that is concerned, they do a hand count, and if there are errors or differences between the counts, they ask for more explanation, and they don’t get it right. And when we have court orders to open ballot boxes because protocol or procedure was not followed, that makes people ask questions.
Searchlight: Your most recent lawsuit asks for emails from an election worker. You filed that suit with Erin Clements, who has been a prominent election denier along with her husband, David. They’ve made numerous false claims about voter fraud and pushed local governments not to certify the vote count in past elections. David Clements suggested that election administrators were guilty of treason and could be dealt with by firing squads.
David Clements called you an “audit partner” in 2022. What’s he referring to?
Goolsby: That’s when we were trying to get the data as far as looking at the information, for trying to get ballots. I was doing the IPRA requests and actually downloading election data from the secretary of state’s website for them to use in their audit.
Searchlight: Do you think that the Clements have gone too far with some of their claims?
Goolsby: I don’t know that I’m going to speculate on that. Everyone’s entitled to an opinion. I’ve traveled the world, and that’s one thing I really appreciate about the U.S. is that we have the free speech to express that opinion. And do I always agree with the people’s opinions? No, I don’t. I don’t always agree with everything, but that doesn’t make them right or me right or them wrong or me wrong.
Searchlight: Let’s talk about the time you spent speaking at Sandoval County Commission meetings. I think you were pretty much there for every single meeting from 2022 to 2024. Tell me about the concerns you had at that time, and what you were advocating for at those meetings?
Goolsby: Just open process. You know, if we had had access to the ballots where we could review them, and if we had been provided with the information requests, we wouldn’t have had to go to court to try to get that data. So, it’s just about the process, advocating for open process. I also spoke on issues apart from elections.
Searchlight: You told the County Commission that there had been forged certificates on vote tabulation machines and you called for Sandoval County Clerk Anne Brady-Romero to resign.
Goolsby: Yes, there were forged certificates. When we were asking about the certification of the machines, the county provided the signed certificates for the tabulators when they do their initial testing.
They’re supposed to have oversight, and those certificates are supposed to be signed by the county clerk — and there were certificates that were signed that, very obviously, forged her name. And then there were certificates that weren’t even signed.
All of these processes are supposed to be consistent, and they’re supposed to be enforced.
Searchlight: Do you still think the county clerk should resign?
Goolsby: No, I don’t. Over time, she has been very forward and very easy to talk with.
Searchlight: Over the past few years you’ve written a number of articles for The Estancia News. Some of those articles accused the secretary of state of “election interference,” claimed that “illegal ballot harvesters” at drop boxes were manipulating vote counts across the country, and that there is a pattern of “election manipulation” in New Mexico.
Do you still hold those positions?
Goolsby: I think the state’s election system has been working towards some things, and some things have happened that are, I think, a little bit better. Like the fact that counties have the option to even opt out of drop boxes if they want to. The thing that has not gotten better is the IPRA requests, and Senate Bill 180, which limited the release of information on elections under IPRA. Instead of letting light shine on information, they have hidden it.
I am very happy, honestly, that we have felons able to vote after they’ve served their time. I think that’s important. I believe everyone should have a voice, and I think that was a good thing. So, there’s a mix.
Searchlight: All these legal actions you’ve filed, and all the hours you’ve spent speaking to county commissioners about elections — they suggest someone who’s very highly motivated to make significant changes to the election system. Do you think our elections need to be overhauled in a fundamental way?
Goolsby: No. I think there are improvements we can make.
Searchlight: According to campaign finance reports, John Eastman contributed $500 to your campaign. Eastman has insisted that the 2020 election was stolen. He was behind a legal strategy to put forward fake electors for President Trump in 2021 in order to block Joe Biden’s victory in that election.
What’s your relationship with Eastman?
Goolsby: I’ve never met him. I’ve never talked with the man.
Searchlight: You’ve talked about the need for voter ID, for verification of citizenship, for more oversight of drop boxes. Are you at all concerned that some of these things would keep eligible voters from being able to cast a ballot?
Goolsby: I think that we can balance security with helping people that are eligible to vote.
I live in Rio Rancho, and as part of the municipal elections, we show ID. I have worked those elections, and I have never had anyone complain or say that they weren’t able to do that. They’re actually very happy to come in and show that that’s who they say they are. Voter ID is a legislative function — there’s nothing I can do, so we have to continue. But if that were to be put forward, I would want it to be a common-sense thing.
We have lots of Native Americans, and if they have problems, their tribal ID should be accepted. And you know, someone said something about Voter ID being hard for women who remarried. Well, my first husband passed away, and so I’ve been married twice, and I’ve never had a problem getting ID.
But here’s the deal: It’s not just about elections. Having ID is about living in life. If you don’t have ID, you can’t cash a check. If you don’t have ID, you can’t pick up medicine. We do need to make sure that we accept ID that is readily accessible, and if for some reason you come to vote and you don’t have it, you can still cast provisional ballots in an affidavit process.
So I don’t feel that it’s disenfranchising anybody. We want to help people.
Searchlight: But is this a solution in search of a problem? You’re talking about the need for all this extra security, but you’re also saying you don’t know if there’s been any fraud or malfeasance in the election system.
Goolsby: My goal is to make people feel confident in the system. So if I have to go in and show an ID to vote in Rio Rancho, it doesn’t bother me if that’s what accountability looks like. I’m fine with that. I hope that people understand that security is important, and that we want everyone that’s eligible to vote to vote.
