John Block

Report: GOP rep. who voted for abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill switches parties

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

The Piñon Post learned Friday that Republican Rep. Phelps Anderson (Chaves, Lea & Roosevelt) who voted for an abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill in a Health and Human Services Committee hearing last week, changed his party affiliation to “Declined to State” after getting blowback.

Republican Leader Jim Townsend said, “I received a letter from him, and I have had a conversation with him, and he has left the Republican Party.”

The Santa Fe New Mexican reported that a text message from Anderson read, “Sorry,” adding, “Not today as I have done enough.”

During the committee hearing, Rep. Anderson claimed he understood concerns health care providers had about the bill regarding conscience rights, however, he voted to advance the measure anyway. 

After the vote, the Piñon Post send a letter asking the Republican Party leadership in the House of Representatives to hold a censure vote on Anderson by this Friday. However, that vote would no longer be necessary, now that Anderson has relinquished his affiliation with the Republican Party–a pro-life party. 

The renunciation by Rep. Anderson leaves his memberships on the Health and Appropriations & Finance committees in jeopardy, as the House Republicans will want Republicans on committees, especially influential committees like Appropriations and Finance.  

Rep. Anderson previously refused to comment on his vote, telling the Santa Fe New Mexican, “I think It’s best that I just leave that one alone now.”

The anti-life bill, H.B. 7, advanced from the Health and Human Services Committee on a vote of 8-3 and subsequently passed the House Judiciary Committee. It is unclear how Rep. Anderson will vote on the bill when it reaches the House floor. 

Report: GOP rep. who voted for abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill switches parties Read More »

GOP bill seeks to require health and safety protocols at abortion facilities during pandemic

2 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

One bill that has not gotten much attention in the media is H.B. 160, a commonsense measure aimed at protecting New Mexico women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The proposal, sponsored by state Reps. Rebecca Dow (R-Grant, Hidalgo & Sierra), Rod Montoya (R-San Juan), James Strickler (R-San Juan), and Rep. Luis Terrazas (R-Doña Ana, Grant & Sierra) would require the New Mexico Department of Health to “establish and require specific health and safety protocols to be used at facilities at which abortions are performed to prevent the spread” of COVID-19 by July 1, 2021. 

The bill states, “The requirements shall include requirements for the use of personal protective equipment, capacity restrictions, enhanced screening procedures and self-isolation and self-quarantine for persons traveling into New Mexico from high-risk areas and low-risk areas.” 

“The requirements shall remain in effect as long as any public health order is in effect pursuant to the Public Health Act for the purpose of controlling or abating the coronavirus disease 2019.” 

The bill appears to be an attempt to protect women while the COVID-19 pandemic continues. As leftist teachers unions and school districts have been complaining about going back to school over health concerns and Democrats have been vigorously working to ram through an abortion up-to-birth bill that would strip protections for multiple groups, this bill looks to set up protections for patients during the pandemic.

On Thursday, Rep. Dow shared her pro-life story on Twitter after another pro-life Representative, T. Ryan Lane (R-San Juan) shared his.

“I’m state Representative Rebecca Dow and choose life. I was nineteen years old–my sophomore year of college–when I learned that I was pregnant. I had about twenty dollars in the bank, and I was attending college on a scholarship. Choosing life was the most challenging and the most rewarding thing I’ve ever done. It changed the trajectory of my life, made me learn a lot faster than I would have had to. Today. My daughter is 27 years old. She has a degree in social work, and her emphasis is working with families and babies who have been going through hard times. I’m so glad I chose life.”

H.B. 160 has been referred to the House Health and Human Services Committee and the Judiciary Committee.

GOP bill seeks to require health and safety protocols at abortion facilities during pandemic Read More »

Dems’ latest assault on oil and gas: adding ‘environmental rights’ to NM Constitution

4 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Far-left members of the New Mexico House of Representatives and Senate have proposed a bill, S.J.R. 3, that would change Article Two of the state’s constitution to add “environmental rights.” The bill sponsors include Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez (D-Bernalillo), Sen. William Soules (D-Doña Ana), Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D-Doña Ana), and Sen. Harold Pope, Jr. (D-Bernalillo). 

The measure, which would require would effectively make it illegal for any kind of energy production, proposes “The people of the state, including future generations, have the right to a clean and healthy environment, including pure water, clean air, healthy ecosystems and a stable climate, and to the preservation of the natural, cultural, scenic and healthful qualities of the environment.” 

“The state, including each branch, agency and political subdivision, shall serve as trustee of the natural resources of the state, among them its waters, air, flora, fauna, climate and public lands. The state shall conserve, protect and maintain these resources for the benefit of all the people, including generations yet to come.” 

“The rights stated in this section are inherent, inalienable and indefeasible, are among those rights reserved to all the people and are on par with other protected inalienable rights. The provisions of this section are self-executing.” 

It is unclear how much the far-out proposal will cost to the state, but the fiscal impact report on the bill notes, “Agencies suggested the repeal of Section 21 of Article 20 removing Legislative powers associated with the regulation of pollution in New Mexico, may call into question environmental statutes previously passed by the Legislature. Additionally, the amendment to Article 2 creates a trustee obligation in each branch, agency, and political subdivisions of the state that could cause confusion regarding how such trusteeships fit with the state’s existing environmental laws and regulations.”

As well as causing confusion regarding the implementation of the proposal, its vagueness will likely make it “unconstitutional” in New Mexico to produce any energy that could potentially emit any kind of “pollutant,” which may be whatever state agencies deem fit.

This would mean agencies such as the state Land Office, run by rabidly anti-energy Secretary Stephanie Garcia Richard, would have 100% dominion over state land and water rights. Also, the conflicting science put forth by many left-wing conspiracy theorists regarding “climate change” could dictate what the constitutional amendment’s definition of “a stable climate” is. 

The constitutional amendment, if implemented, could be the final nail in the coffin for the oil and gas industry in New Mexico, which produces one-third of all revenue to the general fund each year. Public schools and state agencies rely on the industry for survival. 

The bill has been referred to the Senate Rules Committee and the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Dems’ latest assault on oil and gas: adding ‘environmental rights’ to NM Constitution Read More »

Newly sworn-in NM rep. stands up for life in the womb

4 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico Rep. T. Ryan Lane (R-San Juan) is brand new to the New Mexico Legislature, but he’s already ruffling some feathers on the left by standing by his convictions and boldly supporting human life in the womb.

In a video message tweeted out by the New Mexico House Republicans, Rep. Lane told New Mexico why he stands for life.

Here’s what he said: 

“I represent and stand for life because I care about the future of our state. I care about our future citizens who will be teachers, doctors, engineers, farmers, small business owners, and so many other things. And that future will never become a reality because they are not given an opportunity for life. Life is precious and I love all of it. That’s why I stand for life.”

Watch Rep. Lane’s message below and follow him here. 

The Farmington lawmaker wrote on his Facebook in a caption to the video, “Who knew that standing for life could be so controversial? Welcome to the Brave New World.”

Rep. Lane’s message comes as radical Democrats in the Legislature are working hard to ram through an abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill that would strip away protections for babies in the womb, mothers, and health care providers. The Senate version of the bill passed through its last committee on Wednesday by a vote of 6-3 and it heads over to the Senate floor next.

Democrats claim they have the votes to pass the extreme bill after they mounted multiple primary challenges to pro-life Senate Democrats and other pro-life members mysteriously died or faced scandals, leading to their defeats.

Newly sworn-in NM rep. stands up for life in the womb Read More »

Dems’ bill removing mandatory sentences for child rapists likely to be heard in committee Thursday

6 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A far-left bill that has grabbed the attention of many in New Mexico is H.B. 140, sponsored by state Reps. Karen Bash (D-Bernalillo) and Andrea Romero (D-Santa Fe). The bill would eliminate minimum sentences for multiple offenders, including child rapists, poachers, violent felons, violent sexual felons, restraining order violators, and habitual offenders.

Democrat Speaker of the House Brian Egold argued that the bill, which would strip away protections for heinous crimes such as child rape, would merely “restore discretion to judges.”

The fiscal impact report on H.B. 140 paints a different picture, with the report clearly stating that the bill “eliminates the mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of three years for second-degree felony criminal sexual contact of a minor” and “eliminates the mandatory term of imprisonment of three years for the second degree felony of criminal sexual penetration where the victim is between the ages of 13 and 18.” 

With the gaping holes in the bills that could allow child rapists and violent sexual predators back on the streets, many in the public are speaking out about the contents of the bill.

The Republican Party of New Mexico posted on their Facebook page, “It’s immoral, unthinkable that a legislator would want pedophiles to walk our streets after raping our innocent children. This is despicable and Bash is not worthy of serving the public.”

“Remember Victoria Martens? Her own mother allowed men to sexually abuse her and Victoria was later raped, murdered and dismembered. Now Rep. Bash wants to side with these sex monsters.” 

The bill, which would reward sexual criminals and pedophiles, while ignoring the victims is just the latest move by Democrats to loosen laws in New Mexico protecting vulnerable communities in the name of “social justice.”

H.B. 140 was scheduled to be heard on Tuesday in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee, however, it has been rolled back to Thursday, after around 100 people on the Tuesday “virtual” committee hearing waited through a three-hour-long meeting, which did not consider the bill. 

Please reach out to the below legislators in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee to ask them to vote against the bill, which would put victims in danger and reward child rapists and pedophiles. Please also reach out to the bill’s sponsors, Reps. Andrea Romero and tell them to withdraw the bill:

Chairwoman Rep. Liz Thomson (D-Bernalillo): liz.thomson@nmlegis.gov | (505) 986-4415

Vice-Chair/ H.B. 140 SPONSOR Rep. Andrea Romero (D-Santa Fe): andrea@andrearomero.com | (505) 986-4243

Rep. Brittney Barreras (D-Bernalillo): BRITTNEYFORNEWMEXICO@GMAIL.COM | (505) 986-4248

Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval & Santa Fe): stefani.lord@nmlegis.gov | (505) 986-4453

Rep. Randall T. Pettigrew (R-Lea): randall.pettigrew@nmlegis.gov | (505) 986-4467

H.B. 140 SPONSOR: Rep. Karen Bash (D-Bernalillo) karen.bash@nmlegis.gov | (505) 986-4236

Dems’ bill removing mandatory sentences for child rapists likely to be heard in committee Thursday Read More »

NM Democrat’s anti-gun bill would make it a crime to teach your child how to shoot

8 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, S.B. 224 was introduced in the New Mexico Senate, sponsored by far-left state Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez (D-Bernalillo), which tries to not only force New Mexicans to follow guidelines on how they can store guns in their own home, it makes it a crime to teach one’s children how to shoot. 

The bill text reads, “It is an offense for a firearm owner or authorized user to store or keep a firearm in any premises unless the firearm is secured in a locked container or secured by a gun lock or other means so as to render the firearm inaccessible or unusable to any person other than the owner or other authorized user.” 

The “storage mandate” in the bill “would make it a crime for a child to handle your firearm unless the child was 12 or older and had previously completed a firearms safety class. You would become a criminal for taking your child to go shooting if they had not previously taken some kind of formal class,” says the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association (NMSSA). 

“The bill is an uneducated attempt to demonize firearms,” says the organization, adding that  “It is already a crime to place a child in a situation that endangers their life, this law does nothing to add to a child’s safety.”

The bill text reads, “If a firearm owner or authorized user knows or reasonably should have known that a minor, an at-risk person or a prohibited person could gain access to a firearm belonging to or under the control of that owner or authorized person, and if a minor, an at-risk person or a prohibited person obtained access to that firearm, it is an offense if the firearm owner or authorized user failed to secure the firearm in a locked container or by a lock or other means so as to render such firearm inaccessible or unusable to any person other than the firearm owner or other authorized user.” 

NMSSA also notes that, “The law is completely unenforceable unless they plan on going door-to-door inspecting firearm storage in your home. But this bill again goes beyond what they have attempted in the past. If a prohibited possessor gains access to your firearm you are liable as well.” 

“Albuquerque is the property crime capital of America; if your home or vehicle was broken into and a convicted felon stole your firearm, you could be charged with a crime under the bill. Instead of taking on the issue of the crime wave that has engulfed Albuquerque and other parts of the state, Sedillo Lopez wants to blame you, someone just seeking to defend yourself, if your firearm is stolen.” 

The bill will be heard in the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee, where it will be considered in the coming days. Below are the names of members of the Committee to contact them regarding this legislation: 

Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino – (D)  (505) 397-8839 jortizyp@msn.com

Sen. Bill Tallman – (D) (505) 397-8854 bill.tallman@nmlegis.gov

Sen. Gregg Schmedes – (R) (505) 986-4395gregg.schmedes@nmlegis.gov

Sen. David M. Gallegos – (R) (505) 986-4278 david.rsi@hotmail.com

Sen. Stuart Ingle – (R)  (505) 986-4702 stuart.ingle@nmlegis.gov

Sen. Brenda G. McKenna – (D)  (505) 397-8834 brenda.mckenna@nmlegis.gov

Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez – (D) (505) 397-8847 a.sedillolopez@nmlegis.gov

Sen. Elizabeth “Liz” Stefanics – (D) (505) 397-8851 lstefanics@msn.com 

Sen. Sedillo Lopez is a first-term New Mexico senator appointed to her position after an unsuccessful run for Congress against Deb Haaland in 2018. Now, Sedillo Lopez is vying for the First Congressional District seat once again, and this legislation is likely something she is trying to use to court anti-gun donors and support groups, such as Mike Bloomberg’s “Everytown.” Everytown endorsed Haaland in her runs for Congress, along with multiple other rabid anti-gun groups.

Sedillo Lopez’s bill is just the latest in a slew of anti-gun proposals, such as one to criminalize multiple firearms and components and another that seeks to harshen New Mexico’s already stringent “red flag” law.

NM Democrat’s anti-gun bill would make it a crime to teach your child how to shoot Read More »

Deep-pocketed marijuana lobby banking on Legislature’s proposals to legalize weed

3 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, state Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto (D-Bernalillo) introduced a proposal, S.B. 13, to legalize marijuana for recreational use in adults. 

He said, “The reason I decided to do it this time is I got frustrated with the fact that I think people want us to do this in pretty high numbers,” and he wanted to propose a bill that “would pass,” as Democrats’ previous attempts to legalize the drug have been met with large opposition on both sides of the aisle. His bill would tax the substance an extreme 21%, which may, in fact, promote the illegal sale of the drug on the street due to the unaffordable price with taxes.

Ivey Soto received $1,000 from PurLife, a marijuana dispensary headed by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham “maxed out” donor Darren White, in his 2020 bid for re-election. 

Other members of the Legislature have also proposed marijuana legalization bills, including Sen. Cliff Pirtle (R-Chaves, Eddy, and Otero), whose bill, S.B. 288, wants to legalize marijuana and leave private companies such as PurLife with the distribution. Pirtle proposes a 2% excise tax on top of local gross receipts tax on the drug. He received $2,500.00 from PurLife and $1,000 from another marijuana company, Natural RX, in his 2020 bid for re-election.

In an interview months before the 2018 election, which Gov. Lujan Grisham won, PurLife’s Darren White said “Our company got behind Michelle pretty early and we maxed out [its allowable contributions] quickly.” Now, the governor is trying to make it a top-priority to ram through her marijuana bill to fulfill her 2018 campaign promise made to both the voters and to marijuana dispensaries like PurLife. She failed to do so in 2019 and 2020, however, due to more moderate Democrats leaving the chamber due to the Governor running primary challenges against them in the 2020 election, she has a better shot at legalizing weed in the state.

Another legislator who is sponsoring a bill for legalized pot is Rep. Javier Martinez (D-Bernalillo), who said of his bill that “It makes for the perfect conditions if you will. I don’t think the opportunity has ever been better than it is now to pass a legalization bill.” He says New Mexico needs the bill to cover for gaps in the budget. 

Martinez received $5,000 from Darren White’s PurLife for his 2020 re-election bid to the state House. 

UPDATE: The New Mexico Legislature will meet on March 30 for Gov. Lujan Grisham’s special session to force through recreational marijuana since the Governor and her allies failed to pass it in the regular 60-day session.

Other members of the Legislature who received campaign donations from PurLife in the 2020 election cycle: 

Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino (D-Santa Fe): $1,000

Rep. Kelly Fajardo (R-Valencia) $1,000

Rep. Deborah Armstrong (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Rep. Rod Montoya (R-Farmington) $1,000

Sen. Joseph Cervantes (D-Doña Ana) $1,000

New Mexico Senate Democrats $5,000

Rep. Harry Garcia (D-Bernalillo, Cibola, McKinley, Socorro, San Juan & Valencia) $1,000

Sen. Stuart Ingle (R-Chaves, Curry, De Baca, Lea and Roosevelt) $1,000

Rep. Candie Sweetser (D-Grant, Hidalgo & Luna) $1,000

Sen. Craig Brandt (R-Sandoval) $2,500

Rep. Antonio  “Moe” Maestas (D-Bernalillo) $2,500, Moe’s “Moe PAC” $5,500

Fmr. Sen. John Arthur Smith (D-Dona Ana, Hidalgo, Luna & Sierra) $2,500

Brian Egolf Speaker Fund (D-Santa Fe) $2,500

Sen. Mark Moores (R-Bernalillo) $2,500

Sen. Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) $2,500

Fmr. Sen. Sander Rue (R-Bernalillo) $2,500

Fmr. Sen. Mary Kay Papen (D-Doña Ana) $2,500

Rep. Sheryl Williams Stapleton (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Fmr. Sen. Candace Gould (R-Bernalillo & Sandoval) $2,500

Rep. Micaela Cadena (D-Doña Ana) $1,000

Sen. Nancy Rodriguez (D-Santa Fe) $2,500

Rep. Jason Harper (R-Sandoval) $1,000

Rep. Doreen Gallegos (D-Doña Ana) $1,000

Sen. Mimi Stewart (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Rep. Dayan Hochman-Vigil (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Rep. Gail Chasey (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Rep. Eliseo Alcon (D-Cibola & McKinley) $1,000

Sen. George Muñoz (D-Cibola, McKinley and San Juan) $2,500

Sen. Steve Neville (R-San Juan) $2,500 

Other members who received campaign contributions from Nature RX: 

Brian Egolf Speaker Fund (D-Santa Fe) $2,500

Sen. Jacob Candelaria (D-Bernalillo) $500

Rep. Joy Garratt (D-Bernalillo) $250

Sheryl Williams Stapleton (D-Bernalillo) $1,000

Fmr. Sen. Mary Kay Papen (D-Doña Ana) $500

Sen. Pete Campos (D-Colfax, Guadalupe, Harding, Mora, Quay, San Miguel and Taos) $500

Sen. Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) $1,000

Marijuana Company Reynold Greenleaf & Associates, LLC

$5,000 to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham

Donations by “associate” members of the “New Mexico Cannabis Chamber of Commerce.”

Sen. Pete Campos (D-Colfax, Guadalupe, Harding, Mora, Quay, San Miguel and Taos): $5,000 from Affordable Solar on 12/16/2019

Deep-pocketed marijuana lobby banking on Legislature’s proposals to legalize weed Read More »

Liberal columnist applauds state Rep. Anderson’s vote for abortion up-to-birth and infanticide

Leave a Comment / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, liberal New Mexico paper, the Santa Fe New Mexican, applauded New Mexico state Rep. Phelps Anderson (R-Chaves, Lea, and Roosevelt) for his vote with Democrats in the House Health and Human Services Committee to approve an abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill, H.B. 7, which would strip away critical life-saving protections for mothers, babies, and health care workers. 

Milan Simonich, the columnist who wrote the fluff piece, lauded Anderson as “reserved, courteous and almost averse to publicity.” 

When asking Anderson about his vote, which was a betrayal to the Republican Party, Anderson simply said, “I think it’s going to be best if I leave that alone.”

“[Anderson] displayed no rancor or even annoyance. He just didn’t want to talk about a decision that put him at odds with other Republicans and cast him in a harsh light on social media,” wrote Simonich.

He also lauded Anderson’s father, Robert Anderson, of which the University of New Mexico Anderson School of Business is named, and claimed Anderson is “independent” like his dad, who Simonich noted gave money from his oil fortune to support “environmental causes.” 

“Phelps Anderson might be independent enough to argue against an anti-abortion law that does nothing except take up space in the code book,” said Simonich, adding that Anderson may face opposition within the Republican Party. 

He concluded the article by noting how “polite” Anderson is, despite his vote with far-left Democrats for an abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill. 

However, the people of Roswell, who are very pro-life, likely do not have the same admiration as Simonich for Anderson’s supposed “polite” demeanor. To many, the action by Anderson to vote in favor of such an anti-life bill is by no means “polite” or “courteous,” as the liberal Santa Fe newspaper columnist would like to portray him.

The Piñon Post has sent a letter to the Republican House leadership (Leader Jim Townsend (R-Artesia), Whip Rod Montoya (R-Farmington), and Caucus Chair Rebecca Dow (R-Truth or Consequences), requesting a caucus vote to censure Anderson for his anti-life action. The leaders have until Friday. February 5th, 2020 to hold the vote, or the Piñon Post will organize the tens of thousands of pro-life readers to demand Anderson’s resignation and recruit a strong primary challenger. 

Here is what Anderson said during the January 27, 2020 committee hearing, as he spoke to the bill’s sponsor, Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D-Doña Ana):

“It is of my belief that if this bill passes, nothing changes.”

…

“If nothing changes, why then did I in the last 24 to 48 hours receive literally thousands of forms of communication, largely urging a ‘no’ vote, but there were… there were… messages urging votes both ways. And I think, well… I read some of them and I think ‘well, this person is in for [a] disappointment because they’re urging a vote that is not going to affect what it is that concerns them in this message’ and that has given me a great deal of consternation about your bill, not because I—I’m just sort of thinking ‘what is it—what are we doing?’ Do we really have a bill here that really doesn’t do anything? Why not? Why not, Representative Ferrary?”

“Because in my opinion, Roe v. Wade made the 1969 New Mexico abortion law unconstitutional. So I think, ‘Okay, Representative Ferrary wants to repeal an unconstitutional law passed in the State of New Mexico fifty-two years ago more or less.’ And I find myself trying to say, ‘Now what part of that do I disagree with?’ I’m pro-life. I don’t—of many of the people who have spoken to me in the last day or two have expressed strong opinions and many of which I share. But I find myself at the end of this debate long day saying ‘I’m not sure that…voting yes or voting no changes anything—and that is very important to me in this vote—and secondly, I think the issues that have been raised are simply not encompassed within this vote.”

“So, with that, Representative Ferrary, I wanted to say the one thing that I appreciate your comment because the one thing I have heard today that I do think might change based on testimony is the conscience clause, and that will make a difference in how I vote on the House floor if go and believe that the conscience clause is not—is being removed. And I kinda think that I believe right now that that’s not what this repeal is doing, but I will—but we will see this bill again. With that, thank you, madame chairman, thank you Representative Ferrary.”

It should be noted that if the bill passes, life-saving protections, such as age restrictions for minors and conscience protections for health care workers will indeed be stripped, leaving an immediate impact on these groups—which Anderson fails to recognize. Also, a doctor would not be required to perform an abortion, leaving women susceptible to sub-par care and a higher probability of being maimed or killed during the abortion. Read more about H.B. 7 and its identical Senate version, S.B. 10, here.

Liberal columnist applauds state Rep. Anderson’s vote for abortion up-to-birth and infanticide Read More »

Ungrateful NM legislators complain about ‘not getting paid’ despite per diem, pensions

3 Comments / Editorial / By

For years, New Mexico lawmakers have complained incessantly about being the only “citizen legislature” that does not receive an annual salary. Legislators from the Democrat Party and the extreme “moderate” wing of the Republican Party have repeatedly whined about it.

However, these elected leaders knew full-well when running for their place in the House or Senate that their positions were intended as a mostly voluntary position, one of service to the community and one meant not for self-enrichment, but for representation to one’s community.

But some legislators have fallen out-of-touch with the idea of the citizen legislature, such as Rep. Angelica Rubio (D-Doña Ana) who claimed in 2019 while sponsoring a bill to pay legislators a salary, that the current system has people “being left out of the system.”   

Recently, Sen. Bill Soules (D-Doña Ana), who has been in the New Mexico Senate since 2013, tweeted a picture of a dollar bill, writing, “#nmleg. ‘Another day another ………’. Oh wait.  That’s right.  The New Mexico Legislature is unpaid.  The only unpaid legislature in the country.” 

First-term Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez (D-Bernalillo), who is already looking for a promotion to a higher office (U.S. House of Representatives), is already complaining about the Legislature not paying members a traditional salary, chiming in on Soules’ conversation, writing, “Being unpaid and part-time makes this branch of government weak.” 

“Moderate” Rep. Alonzo Baldonado (R-Valencia), while defending Rep. Kelly Fajardo’s (R-Valencia) vote in favor of Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s “mini” Green New Deal, wrote, “For all of you out there that think making votes and not getting paid to do it is easy….I say you go do it.” In 2022, many conservative Republicans will do it, and hopefully, strong patriots who do not cower will run against Reps. Fajardo and Baldonado to bring true representation to the Legislature—actual servants of the people who will not complain about the job they knew full-well they were getting into. 

Multiple other “moderate” Republicans and leftist Democrats have complained about the pay strucutre of New Mexico legislators.

But despite all the misinformation from ungrateful supposed “public servants,” legislators in New Mexico do get reimbursed through a daily per diem for their work, which is $184 a day and 58 cents a mile. They also get a hefty pension for their service. After ten years, it amounts to $10,824.00. 

The point of New Mexico’s legislature is for it to work for New Mexicans—not the other way around. Just remember, senators and representatives in the U.S. Congress get paid hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for not doing much at all. Having regular citizens who work jobs in the time they are not in the New Mexico Legislature (usually 10-11 months each year) serving as our representatives, brings them closer to the people they are supposed to represent, and makes them more accountable to their constituents.

Let us never forget that public servants are supposed to represent us. Those who are quick to complain about the trust we have placed in them or are putting their own well-being above that of New Mexicans should not be rewarded by getting another term in any elected office, much less a seat in the New Mexico House or Senate.

Ungrateful NM legislators complain about ‘not getting paid’ despite per diem, pensions Read More »

Even Gov. MLG won’t tolerate far-left lawmaker’s insane proposals

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, Opinion, Politics / By

During the 2021 Legislative Session, far-left Sen. Jacob Candelaria (D-Bernalillo) has proposed multiple bills to ram through his extremist agenda. However, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who has been an ally of the fringe left-wing, won’t even go for Candelaria’s bills.

One of his legislative proposals seeks to erase governors’ ability to use the “pocket veto,” which is a de-facto veto of legislation after a certain date if the Governor decides not to sign the bill. Candelaria reportedly called the pocket veto an “unnecessary, anti-transparency, anti-good government provision in our Constitution.” The Governor’s office called Candelaria’s legislation “too burdensome,” and Democrat Leader Peter Wirth voted against it. 

Another far-fetched proposal by Candelaria sought to eliminate private prisons in New Mexico. The Associated Press reported that “The top prison official under Democratic Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham voiced opposition to a bill that would make it unlawful for the state and local governments to contract with private prisons across New Mexico,” dealing another major blow to Candelaria’s whack ideas. Candelaria has also voiced support for “demilitarizing” the police. 

A sad Candelaria wrote on Twitter, “Disappointed that @GovMLG opposes bill to end private prisons in NM.” 

Candelaria has long been a laughing stock of New Mexico after he marched with Black Lives Matter insurrectionist domestic terrorists over the Summer and then offered to defend looters and rioters in court pro-bono.

Then, in October, once one of his constituents got tired of his whining, they sent him some nasty messages, which resulted in him calling the police, begging for protection from the benign threat.

He then used his position “as a Senator” to threaten officers who responded to his call, invoking the name of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, claiming he would call them on the state police officers. Once the officers explained to him the supposed threat could be interpreted in many different ways, he snapped and threw the helpful officers out of his domicile. 

Once his constituents started calling him out for his hypocrisy, he targeted them, including a Catholic priest, who Candelaria sent GIFs of scantily clad male models with the strange caption, “I LOVE BEING GAY! That’s a fact.” He also targeted Bernalillo County Sheriff Manny Gonzales. 

Later, in November 2020, Candelaria made a fool out of himself by posting a picture of a luxury French fashion box that presumably contained hundreds, if not thousands of dollars of designer goods, and wrote an eyebrow-raising caption to the post in the attempt to show off his new goods. He wrote, “Treat yo self. [sic] The road is long and the fights are hard—-celebrating your joy is a seditious act.” It is unclear what Candelaria meant by “seditious act.” 

He’s subsequently used his Twitter account to lash out at elected officials in higher offices, such as Gov. Lujan Grisham and Republican U.S. Rep. Yvette Herrell (CD-2). It is unclear what Candelaria’s mental state is like. However, he claims he has “PTSD” from the alleged nasty messages he received in October. Now, even Gov. Lujan Grisham won’t take his calls and is shooting down his whack legislation for being even too whack for her. 

Even Gov. MLG won’t tolerate far-left lawmaker’s insane proposals Read More »

1 … 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 … 135

Stay Updated

Scroll to Top