New Mexico

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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. 

‘Worse’ red-flag law proposed, anti-life bills to be heard Friday

3 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

The 2021 Legislative Session is in full-swing and here are some updates on some of the most divisive anti-gun and anti-life bills:

Anti-Gun Bills

On Thursday, it was revealed that far-left Democrat lawmakers in the New Mexico House of Representatives are looking to ram through even more divisive anti-gun legislation, this time in the form of an amended “red-flag” law, H.B. 193, which will make Michelle Lujan Grisham’s 2020 version of the bill signed into law even worse. 

According to the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association’s Zac Fort (NMSSA), the bill was proposed because Democrats became “frustrated that the initial law has hardly been used.” The bill would give the authority to a police officer to request an “extreme risk” red-flag order directly, further circumventing the process and making it easier to violate due process rights enshrined in the U.S. Constitution. Fort notes that “The order would allow the police officer to search the home of the defendant and seize any firearms the officer finds.” 

“The red-flag gun confiscation order has been a failure, as has every gun-control law passed in New Mexico. No one has been made safer, we only have fewer rights to show for it. Rather than making a bad thing worse, we need to repeal the red-flag law to protect New Mexicans civil liberties,” writes Fort. 

Another overtly anti-Second Amendment bill, H.B. 166, is also being considered, proposing bans on multiple types of firearms components and self-made firearms, turning owners of such firearms into felons. Read the Piñon Post’s full analysis of the bill here.  The bills will be considered in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee. Members of the Committee can be found here. 

Anti-life bills

Also coming down the pipeline are two anti-life bills, H.B. 47 and H.B. 7. The first bill, H.B. 47, is an anti-life physician-assisted suicide bill that includes some horrifying language. The bill, sponsored by a far-left friend of Gov. Lujan Grisham, Rep. Deborah Armstrong (D-Bernalillo), alongside Senators Liz Stefanics (D-Santa Fe) and Bill O’Neill (D-Bernalillo), proposes a signed document where an individual requesting to have a medical professional help them kill themselves acknowledging the following:

“I understand the full import of this request, and I expect to die if I self-administer the medical aid in dying medication prescribed. I further understand that although most deaths occur within three hours, my death may take longer.”

The bill would dehumanize New Mexicans living with a terminal illness and leave them open to self-administering a fatal poison that could not only not work but could leave them in more pain than they started with, among other concerns. 

The assisted suicide bill will be heard on January 29, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. in the House Health and Human Services Committee. Members of the Committee can be found here.   

H.B. 7, the abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill would strip critical life-saving protections for babies in the womb and mothers. It would also strip out essential protections of conscience for medical professionals, safeguarding them from being forced to perform abortions. Because the statute is flatly stripped out, the bill would allow underaged mothers to get abortions without their parents’ consent, opening up unsafe opportunities for human trafficking and abuse. The bill would allow any medical professional (not just a doctor) to perform the abortion, leaving women in risky positions, where they could face life-altering injuries and death. 
The abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill will be considered in the House Judiciary Committee on Friday, January 29, 2020, at 8:30 a.m. Legislators in the committee can be found here.

Democrat-loving NM Oil & Gas Assoc. ‘encouraged’ by Biden’s drilling ban

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

On Wednesday, the Santa Fe New Mexican ran an article detailing the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association’s (NMOGA) willingness to work with the rabidly anti-oil and gas Joe Biden administration to “work through” problems to “find middle ground.” 

Unfortunately for NMOGA and its executive director Ryan Flynn, Joe Biden and his anti-energy choices in the Cabinet, such as Green New Deal-loving Rep. Deb Haaland (D-New Mexico), his designated choice for Department of the Interior, want an all-out assault on the oil and gas industry.

Joe Biden has already signed a slew of anti-energy executive orders in his first few days banning all new leases and permits for drilling on U.S. land indefinitely, canceling the Keystone XL pipeline with Canada, and re-entering the United States in the Paris Climate Accord, which the United Nations itself admitted is a sham. 

Now, despite Flynn’s whining about the New Mexico budget being aided by oil and gas, his organization still naively thinks it can find a supposed “middle ground” with Biden to “strike that balance then that will help ensure there’s not unnecessary damage on the industry in New Mexico.” 

The Santa Fe New Mexican reports:

A key official [Ryan Flynn] within the state’s energy industry said he is encouraged by the Biden administration’s yearlong moratorium on new oil and gas leases on federal lands, which he contends is better than the U.S. Interior Department’s halt on leases announced last week.

Flynn even said appeared to expect his industry to collapse, telling the Santa Fe New Mexican, “It’s not like a transition away from oil and gas products is going to occur in a week or year or even in the next 10 years.” 

For years, the New Mexico Oil & Gas Association has aided Democrats in their efforts to enact radical anti-energy policies, including their “neutral” stance on Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s “mini” Green New Deal (Energy Transition Act), which they and multiple “Republican” members of the New Mexico Legislature helped get passed. The law will completely wipe out the oil and gas industry by the year 2050. 

Those “Republican” legislators who voted for it include Rep. Kelly Fajardo (Valencia), Rep. Bill Rehm (Bernalillo), Sen. Greg Baca (Bernalillo and Valencia), fmr. Sen. Candace Gould (Bernalillo and Sandoval), Sen. Ron Griggs (Doña Ana, Eddy and Otero), Sen. Mark Moores (Bernalillo), Sen. Cliff Pirtle (Chaves, Eddy and Otero), and fmr. Sen. James White (Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe, and Torrance). 

But not only did NMOGA refuse to fight against the Democrats’ assaults on the energy industry (which they purport to represent), the organization directly funded radical Democrats with tens of thousands of dollars in political contributions to help them do it. 

A Piñon Post report details NMOGA’s political contributions to Democrats, including $25,000 to Democrat Speaker Brian Egolf’s PAC in the 2020 election cycle, which helped elect ruthlessly anti-oil and gas extremists to the Legislature, $5,000 to then-Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham, in her 2018 bid for governor, and countless others.

Even Republican leaders in New Mexico have called NMOGA and Ryan Flynn out for his betrayal of the industry, with many top Republicans penning a scathing op-ed calling out the weak, spineless, and anti-energy approach the organization has used. 

Here’s a snippet from the op-ed: 

So, what is Flynn’s motive? We aren’t exactly sure, but this pattern of lies has effectively destroyed any trust we had in him to be a fair advocate for NMOGA. While we cannot dictate to NMOGA who should be running its organization, we would suggest the association consider putting a person in its leadership who does not spread misinformation and puts personal political preferences ahead of the interests of the oil and gas industry and the workers it supports.

Now, Flynn wants to “work” with the Joe Biden administration to find “middle ground,” and even though it is unlikely, it doesn’t’ seem like NMOGA is too worried about fighting for their industry, since Flynn is expecting to “transition away” from oil and gas in ten years’ time. 

GOP NM state rep. betrays constituents—votes for abortion up-to-birth and infanticide

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Wednesday, the New Mexico House Health Committee heard the House version of a radical abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill, H.B. 7, that would strip away critical life-saving protections for babies in the womb, women, and health care professionals. 

“This bill does not address current practice or availability of abortion. It’s a repeal of an antiquated 1969 law,” the bill sponsor, Rep. Deb Armstrong (D-Bernalillo), said of her bill. Other sponsors and “experts” repeatedly used the term “antiquated” to describe the life-saving current law on the books.

Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval, and Santa Fe) noted how her office received over 6,000 calls from constituents, most of them asking her to vote against the radical anti-life bill.

During the testimony part of the hearing, a labor and delivery nurse said, “I’ve held pre-mature babies and I can tell you they are very much alive.” 

Rep. Phelps Anderson (R-Chaves, Lea, and Roosevelt) said during his time to speak, “It is of my belief that if this bill passes, nothing changes,” which the bill’s co-sponsor, Rep. Ferrary agreed with him on, despite the bill’s passage ripping critical protections away from multiple groups.

He then added the following:

“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 I 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.”

After testimony from the public and questioning the bill sponsors, who refused to say their bill would legalize abortion up to birth, the measure came up for a vote. After stalling for a while, supposed “pro-life” Rep. Phelps Anderson (R-) voted with all the radical Democrats on the committee in favor of the abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill. The measure ultimately passed on a vote of 8-3. The bill now goes to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration.

The betrayal by Anderson is a revelation of the pro-abortion “Republicans” hiding in the shadows in the New Mexico Legislature, who are slowly revealing what side they truly are on. Find Rep. Anderson’s contact information here.

NM unions, leftist public officials complain after MLG finally lifts ban on in-person learning

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

On Tuesday, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham delivered her “virtual” State of the State address, in which she announced in-person learning would resume at New Mexico schools. She said, “every school district in the state will be able to welcome all ages of students safely back to the classroom on February 8.” 

The move comes after New Mexico ranked as the state with the highest suicide rate in the United States, with the rate for children ages 4-15 increasing by 88%. To deal with this, the Governor claimed her proposed budget has an 800% increase for suicide prevention. 

During the speech, Gov. Lujan Grisham touted her “solid, epidemiologically-sound plan for a safe expansion of in-person learning for all age groups, supported by union leadership.” The Public Education Department outlined the three options school districts have, per the Albuquerque Journal:

All schools throughout the state may bring back students on a hybrid model in which 50% of students return at a time to maintain social distancing.

Districts and schools with fewer than 100 students can bring back all students as long as no more than six people are in an enclosed space at one time.

Schools and districts that aren’t ready for the full hybrid return can expand small-group instruction to all grades.

However, liberal teachers unions and leftist public officials cried about the decision, with Albuquerque American Federation of Teachers president Ellen Bernstein complaining that “The teachers still need to get vaccinated. They still need COVID leave.”

National Education Association of New Mexico (NEA-NM) reportedly lauded the Governor’s decision, claiming she “has done just about everything that a governor can do to keep citizens in this state safe. She has shut things down. She has required people to wear masks. She has fined people for not doing so,” but they want teachers to be the “priority in the vaccination rollout.”

Far-left state Rep. G. Andrés Romero, a teacher at Atrisco High School in Albuquerque, said he “worried that switching from remote learning to a hybrid model could be an added stress on teachers and students who already strained. He urged caution to districts considering the option,” according to the Santa Fe New Mexican.

Albuquerque Public Schools Interim Superintendent Scott Elder said of the Governor’s decision that “There’s a lot of excitement and truthfully some trepidation over the governor’s announcement today,” but he would work with state officials on a safe re-opening plan.

The move by the Governor comes after months of pressure from Republicans across New Mexico, who have urged her repeatedly to reopen the state, such as the Republican Party of New Mexico, who urged the Governor to take after Las Vegas’ example: 

Following the Governor’s address, New Mexico House Republican Whip Rod Montoya (R-Farmington) released a statement, saying, “I am glad that the Governor’s interpretation of the science is finally lining up with our neighbor states when it comes to reopening our schools. It is unfortunate that our school children have had to sacrifice a year of education under this Governor’s extreme executive orders. I fear that the Governor’s effect on our failing economy will be just as long-lasting as her effect on our student’s academic regression.” 

“It is about time that the Governor is finally viewing this crisis through the lens of medical science and not political science,” added House Republican Leader Jim Townsend (R-Artesia), who has been critical of the Governor’s COVID-19 response throughout the pandemic. 

1 … 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 … 205

Stay Updated

Scroll to Top