New Mexico

As Gov. MLG signs abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill, she decries ‘dehumanization’

On Friday, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced that she had signed the radical abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill, S.B. 10, which the House of Representatives passed last week stripping away all protections for women, babies in the womb, and medical professionals.

In a condescending quote, Lujan Grisham said, “A woman has the right to make decisions about her own body,” adding, “Anyone who seeks to violate bodily integrity, or to criminalize womanhood, is in the business of dehumanization. New Mexico is not in that business – not any more. Our state statutes now reflect this inviolable recognition of humanity and dignity. I am incredibly grateful to the tireless advocates and legislators who fought through relentless misinformation and fear-mongering to make this day a reality. Equality for all, equal justice and equal treatment – that’s the standard. And I’m proud to lead a state that today moved one step closer to that standard.” 

Notice she claims pro-lifers are “violat[ing] bodily autonomy” (wrong), “criminaliz[ing] womanhood” (wrong), and are “in the business of dehumanization.” 

The false and ironic rhetoric from the Governor comes as she just signed a bill allowing late-term abortionists to rip infants limb from limb just moments before birth, not to mention infanticide–killing infants AFTER birth, which is already occurring in New Mexico. 

The bill’s sponsor, Sen. Linda Lopez (D-Bernalillo), who refused to defend her bill on the Senate floor, said, “Thank you to Governor Lujan Grisham for signing this legislation, thank you to every one of my fellow bill sponsors and community advocates, and thank you to all of the voters of New Mexico who made your voices heard in the last election. Abortion is a personal health care decision. We can hold our own moral values on abortion and still trust individuals to make their own reproductive health care decisions.”

Previously, the 2019 version of the bill, H.B. 51 died in the New Mexico Senate after pro-life Democrats rejected the extreme bill. Out of spite, Lujan Grisham put her entire political machine into primary challengers to destroy these pro-life Democrats in the 2020 election. One of these pro-life Democrats, Sen. Carlos Cisneros passed away before the election.

Now, Democrats are looking to ram through another extreme anti-life bill, assisted suicide H.B. 47, which passed the House of Representatives with one Republican, Rep. Kelly Fajardo (R-Valencia), joining Democrats to help pass it through the chamber. Its next step is the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Legislative Alert: Dems trying to resurrect failed enviro bill, committee considering anti-police bill

Thursday was a busy day in the New Mexico Legislature, with the Senate Tax, Business, and Transportation Committee approving Gov. Lujan Grisham’s radical environmental bill, S.B. 11 carried by Sen. Mimi Stewart (D-Bernalillo) on party lines. This bill would result in a 20 cent or higher increase in gas prices, which would disproportionately harm the poor. Read more here.

A commonsense bill to protect women’s sports, H.B. 304, sponsored by Reps. Zachary Cook (R-Lincoln and Otero), Rod Montoya (R-San Juan), Jim Townsend (R-Chaves, Eddy, and Otero), among others sought to restrict participation by transgender athletes to the sports teams assigned to their “biologic sex.” The bill died on a 3-2 vote in the House Health and Human Services Committee. Far-left dark money groups lobbied against the critical bill, claiming it to be “transphobic.” 

There are many important committee meetings coming up on Friday and Saturday, and it is imperative the public shows up to testify against extreme bills that would harm New Mexico. Here is critical information you need to know about bills rushing through the Legislature: 

New Mexico Senate:

CONSERVATION COMMITTEE
Senator Elizabeth Stefanics, Chair – Saturday, February 27, 2021 – 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

URGENT ALERT: 

S.B. 312 GAME & FISH & WILDLIFE CHANGES by Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D-Doña Ana) and Rep. Nathan Small (D-Doña Ana). The bill previously died in the Senate Conservation Committee, with Democrat Sen. Liz Stefanics (Bernalillo, Lincoln, San Miguel, Santa Fe, Torrance, and Valencia), the chair of the committee, voting with Republicans to table it.

“My district is parts of six counties — it is all rural — and I, in this case, I’m going to have to support my constituents,” said Stefanics.

Now, Sen Steinborn and Rep. Small are looking to resurrect the failed 241-page proposal which would have taken power away from the people and given it to the government. According to liberals, it would give “wildlife conservation” a “modern approach to wildlife management. It directs the state to manage and conserve the public’s wildlife.” This power-grab would mean higher permit prices for many out-of-state permits, harsher restrictions on what wildlife one could hunt, and it would rename the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to the “Department of Wildlife Conservation.” 

The extreme and costly overhaul bill would have further bureaucratized the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and according to the bill itself, “[narrows] conditions for landowners on taking or killing animals on private land.” That means, in part, that it usurps the right for landowners to kill a wild animal on their land, for reasons of immediate threats to human life and for damage of property, including crops. It would now only allow killing the animal for the threat to human life. This would be required to be reported to the Department within 24 hours of disposal of the carcass. 

These burdensome restrictions, among countless other flaws in the bill, such as a large appropriation necessary for its passage, are a detriment to taxpayers, landowners, and hunters in the state. Many landowners and employers testified in opposition while extremist “conservation” groups tried to pass the bill forward. Read the fiscal impact report on the bill for more information. Please 

For spoken public comment register at https://forms.gle/5pgx2bgxGyHEDeCS8  by Friday, February 26 at 5:00 p.m. Submit written comment any time by emailing SCONC@nmlegis.gov with your Name, Entity Represented, Bill #, For or Against. You will be contacted by our Zoom Operator with the virtual meeting instructions.

HEALTH AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino, Chair – Friday, February 26, 2021 – 1:30 p.m.

H.B. 254 – USE OF DEADLY FORCE REPORTING by Sen. Antoinette Sedillo-Lopez (D-Bernalillo) and Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Bernalillo) passed the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee by a party-line vote of 3-2. 

Note: both of the bill sponsors are currently running for Congress in CD-1. This is the House version of the Senate’s S.B. 274. 

According to the bill, “Within twenty-four hours of a person suffering great bodily harm or death as a result of a peace officer’s actions, the sheriff or the chief of police of the jurisdiction in which the great bodily harm or death occurred shall report the great bodily harm or death in writing to the district attorney of the judicial district in which the great bodily harm or death occurred. The sheriff or chief of police shall report all instances of suspected great bodily harm to the appropriate district attorney, even if a more thorough assessment of great bodily harm will be undertaken at a later date,” 

The bill would put undue suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of the law enforcement officer, overburdening local sheriffs and district attorneys, while not trusting police officers to carry forth their duties. It now moves forward to its final committee, House Judiciary. 

For spoken public comment register at https://ggle.io/3pe5. If there is a high volume of requests for public comment, not everyone may be able to speak. Zoom link to the meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89738905182 

SENATE TAX, BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Senator Benny Shendo Jr., Chair – Saturday, February 27, 2021 – 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.

SB 13 CANNABIS REGULATION ACT by Sen. Daniel Ivey-Soto (D-Bernalillo). This particular bill, which puts a 21% tax on recreational marijuana, is supported by the far-left fringe group the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).

SB 288 CANNABIS REGULATION ACT by Sen. Cliff Pirtle (R-Chaves, Eddy and Otero).

SB 363 CANNABIS REGULATION ACT by Sen. Jacob Candelaria (D-Bernalillo). 

All these bills relate to the legalization of recreational marijuana. You can read more about each by clicking on “analysis” and “fiscal impact report” on the above links for each bill.  Read more about these marijuana bills and the big money the weed industry has put into each of these bill sponsors. 

For public participation send an email to SCORC@nmlegis.gov with your Name, Entity Represented, Bill #, For or Against and indicate if you wish to speak. The deadline to respond is Friday, February 26 at 5:00 p.m. You will be contacted by our Zoom Operator with the virtual meeting instructions. Zoom link to the meeting: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/83239240693 

Despite protests of 20+ cent per gallon gas price hike on the poor, Dem enviro bill passes committee

On Thursday, the Senate Tax, Business, and Transportation Committee, on a vote of 7-4, passed S.B. 11, the “Clean Fuel Standard Act” despite protests from many of the public about the extreme effects of the bill on the poor and middle class, who would be most harmed by it. Sen. Mimi Stewart (D-Bernalillo) is the bill sponsor.

The bill puts extreme clean fuel standards on businesses that produce or import transportation fuels and fuels used in motor vehicles. The restrictions on these companies would force them to invest in costly upgrades to their fuel standards, meaning these costs would transfer to the consumers. The bill also adds vague and sweeping “enviro-justice” provisions to state law.

In California and Oregon, where clean fuel standards are already in place, there are already increased costs of up to 24 cents per gallon on gas, which directly hurts poor consumers.

Sen. Martin Hickey (D-Bernalillo) brought this concern up. He said, “I’m concerned too much of the cost is going to be born by those who can’t afford to do it.” 

New Mexico Energy Secretary James Kenney and Economic Development Secretary Alicia Keys tried to downplay the cost concern, claiming the effects on direct costs to the consumers were more like two cents per gallon, not citing any evidence to prove these numbers. 

Sen. Craig Brandt (D-Sandoval) asked the question again, to which Sen. Stewart got flustered, having the very real concern repeated to her. She said in a stern voice, “You know what gas costs in Europe? It costs 6-7 a gallon!” She said people drove smaller electric cars in the region and said she didn’t appreciate “the sky is falling” arguments regarding concerns attributed to her bill. Stewart also complained about the committee hearing nearing two hours long on her bill.

Sen. Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) lamented the bill didn’t go far enough on “climate change,” citing Joe Biden’s climate envoy John Kerry who apparently said the world has “twelve years to evade the worst possible consequences” of “climate change.” Sen. Wirth stressed his point that “climate change is obviously is here!” 

“This s can be a huge boom in terms of jobs–jobs that pay well and have benefits with really proper companies,” stressed Secretary Keyes, despite any tangible arguments or information that could back up her claims. All that was truly apparent in the hearing was that companies that manufacture and transport carbon-emitting fuels will be penalized, and the poor would be forced to eat the cost of the legislation. 

The New Mexico Oil and Gas Association (NMOGA), which took a neutral stance on Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s “mini” Green New Deal (The Energy Transition Act) is also taking a neutral stance on this bill. NMOGA dumped thousands into Democrat campaigns in 2018 and 2020. 

S.B. 11 now heads to Senate Finance for approval, where its proposed $3,200,000 appropriation will be scrutinized, as well as its fiscal impacts. 

Senate committee narrowly advances most extreme anti-police bill in the nation

On Wednesday, the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee met to consider S.B. 227, which the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has dubbed the most extreme or “the strongest” anti-police “use of force” standard instituted in the nation. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Linda Lopez (D-Bernalillo).

After massive public outcry, the bill’s sponsor tweaked the bill slightly in a committee substitute to take away the bill’s ban on pepper spray, rubber pellets, take out a provision mandating a 45-second delay before an officer can enter a premise, and a section making the bill mandatory not only for police officers but for corrections officers also.

Despite the small concessions by the bill sponsor, the “expert witnesses,” Barron Jones and Paige Fernandez, both from the ACLU who lauded the bill, invoking the name of the late George Floyd, a felon and drug addict who died over the summer during an arrest where a police officer put his knee on Floyd’s neck. 

Fernandez claimed the new regulations encompassed in the extreme bill would institute new “tactics” and “de-escalation techniques” that would cripple officers in how they can do their jobs by removing the “reasonable” use of force standard. 

Multiple police unions, officers, and pro-law enforcement groups testified in support of the bill, 

Douglas Ford, Chief of Police at the Clovis Police Department testified that the bill’s removal of less lethal options would be “sending us back thirty years in law enforcement. These are the tools we use to help in de-escalating and not using the force that is unnecessary.” 

Roger Jimenez, the Chief of Police with the Española Police Department echoed these statements, talking about how because of the less-lethal force available, his officers were able to tase “and subdue” a man who was wielding a knife instead of using lethal options. He said if his officers did not have those tools at their disposal, “this gentleman would have been shot and killed.”

On the other side of the argument, many social justice advocates invoked George Floyd’s name and “community activists” with dark money Mike Bloomberg group “Moms Demand Action,” an organization with a mission to disarm America.

Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez called this bill “important” to “transform” the bill, which she said compliments another anti-police bill she is sponsoring. Sen. Lopez responded, “We have to look at the totality of the system.” 

Sen. Gregg Schmedes (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe & Torrance) took exception with the use of “totality of the circumstances” in the bill, which Sen. Lopez had her “expert” Paige Fernandez explain away. He repeatedly made the point that he wants police officers to be able to have the ability to respond with appropriate “discretion” so they can do their jobs appropriately. 

Sen. David Gallegos (R-Eddy & Lea) emphasized the need to tailor this bill to all communities in New Mexico, not just high-crime areas like Albuquerque. “The rural communities have a different relationship with their safety officers, and I think we could cause them harm by including them in the same scenario that you would in Albuquerque because that seems to be where the problem is.” 

The extreme anti-law enforcement bill passed the committee on a vote of 4-3. Sens. David Gallegos, Gregg Schmedes, and Bill Tallman (D-Bernalillo) voted against the bill. If Sen. Stuart Ingle (R-Chaves, Curry, De Baca, Lea, and Roosevelt), who was excused, had been present, the bill would have been tabled. S.B. 227 now moves forward to Senate Judiciary Committee.

NM Dems release frantic defense of Deb Haaland after confirmation hearing trainwreck

Over the past two days, Deb Haaland has been questioned in front of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in the confirmation process for Department of the Interior secretary. 

However, during the hearings, she has had trouble with forming coherent sentences or giving direct answers, constantly repeating vague terms like “I understand” or “I appreciate what you are saying” without formulating tangible answers to give any information that could help senators understand her qualifications.

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID) plainly asked Haaland, “Did you or do you now support the Biden action of shutting down the Keystone Pipeline his first day in office?” She refused to answer the question, responding, “I have to respect it, uh, Senator. He is the president of the United States and I realize that, um, these are some of the things that he talked about when he was running for office.” Not until Sen. Risch had to press three more times did he get a vaguely discernible answer from Haaland where she finally said, “I will tend to support President Biden’s positions. I assume you could take my answer as a yes.” 

During one line of questioning by Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY), Haaland was asked why she made the statement that she would vote to legalize marijuana to account for lost jobs in the oil and gas industry due to extreme government regulation. She claimed her argument was merely one about “diversify[ing] our funding streams.” 

Barrasso pressed her, “Is selling marijuana among what the Biden administration calls ‘better choices… to give jobs to displaced oil and gas workers?” Haaland said she didn’t know Biden’s position on the legalization of weed. Barrasso clapped back, “Well, we know what your stance is on replacing the revenue from the energy jobs… And your preference is to turn to drugs is what you’ve recommended to the voters.” 

During another exchange, Haaland had difficulty answering basic questions about oil and gas pipelines on federal lands from Sen. James Lankford (R-OK), ultimately admitting she didn’t know the answer to the question.

After Haaland’s disastrous performance, the Democrat Party of New Mexico (DPNM) released a panicky statement, trying to bolster Haaland as “qualified” (of course) because she is a Native American woman. However, despite Haaland’s ancestry, she has nothing of achievement in the field of land or resource management that she can credit as her own other than taking extreme positions that will inevitably bankrupt New Mexico and the United States.

Here is what the Democrat Party of New Mexico released: 

“Representative Haaland made it unequivocally clear today that her knowledge, passion, and experience make her the right person to take on the responsibilities of Secretary of the Interior,” said DPNM Chair Marg Elliston. “As a fierce advocate for New Mexico, Representative Haaland has shown that she can work across the aisle to enact the sort of forward-thinking policies that we need in our federal government. As this confirmation process begins, it’s clear that she will continue to make New Mexicans proud as a voice for all those who cherish and value our nation’s natural resources.” 

Haaland is by no means a “bipartisan” member of Congress, voting 95% of the time with radical socialist “Squad” member Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) over 95% of the time. 

After the shameful performance in front of the committee, Western States Director Larry Behrens of the pro-energy group “Power the Future” released the following statement:

“It’s pathetic that Senators need to ask Deb Haaland the same question four times before they get a straight answer from her. In fact, the number of answers Deb Haaland doesn’t have is stunning. 

Deb Haaland has a long record of radical statements and actions, but for the last two days she would have us believe she doesn’t have a position on critical issues facing New Mexico and the rest of the nation. Deb Haaland is pretending to be someone else during these hearings and it’s clear some of the Senators aren’t convinced.”

Haaland’s nomination hangs by a thread, with the New York Times reporting that Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) may derail her nomination due to her anti-energy extremism. If this happens, it would be a massive blow to DPNM and Joe Biden, after Biden’s other cabinet pick for the Office of Personnel Management, Neera Tanden, will likely get the boot from the Senate after Manchin rejected her.

Legislative Update: Far-left wildlife bill dies, radical anti-police legislation to be heard Wednesday

S.B. 312 GAME & FISH & WILDLIFE CHANGES by Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D-Doña Ana) and Rep. Nathan Small (D-Doña Ana), a bill opposed by the Piñon Post died in the Senate Conservation committee with Democrat Sen. Liz Stefanics (Bernalillo, Lincoln, San Miguel, Santa Fe, Torrance, and Valencia), the chair of the committee, voting with Republicans to table it. 

“My district is parts of six counties — it is all rural — and I, in this case, I’m going to have to support my constituents,” she said.

The extreme and costly bill would have taken power away from the people and given it to the government. According to liberals, it would give “wildlife conservation” a “modern approach to wildlife management. It directs the state to manage and conserve the public’s wildlife.” This power-grab would mean higher permit prices for many out-of-state permits, harsher restrictions on what wildlife one could hunt, and it would rename the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to the “Department of Wildlife Conservation.” 

The 241-page overhaul bill would have further bureaucratized the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and according to the bill itself, “[narrows] conditions for landowners on taking or killing animals on private land.” That means, in part, that it usurps the right for landowners to kill a wild animal on their land, for reasons of immediate threats to human life and for damage of property, including crops. It would now only allow killing the animal for the threat to human life. This would be required to be reported to the Department within 24 hours of disposal of the carcass. 

These burdensome restrictions, among countless other flaws in the bill, such as a large appropriation necessary for its passage, are a detriment to taxpayers, landowners, and hunters in the state. Many landowners and employers testified in opposition while extremist “conservation” groups tried to pass the bill forward. Read the fiscal impact report on the bill for more information.

H.B. 254 – USE OF DEADLY FORCE REPORTING by Sen. Antoinette Sedillo-Lopez (D-Bernalillo) and Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Bernalillo) passed the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee by a party-line vote of 3-2. 

Note: both of the bill sponsors are currently running for Congress in CD-1. This is the House version of the Senate’s S.B. 274. 

According to the bill, “Within twenty-four hours of a person suffering great bodily harm or death as a result of a peace officer’s actions, the sheriff or the chief of police of the jurisdiction in which the great bodily harm or death occurred shall report the great bodily harm or death in writing to the district attorney of the judicial district in which the great bodily harm or death occurred. The sheriff or chief of police shall report all instances of suspected great bodily harm to the appropriate district attorney, even if a more thorough assessment of great bodily harm will be undertaken at a later date,” 

The bill would put undue suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of the law enforcement officer, overburdening local sheriffs and district attorneys, while not trusting police officers to carry forth their duties. It now moves forward to its final committee, House Judiciary. 

H.B. 306CONCEALED HANDGUN LICENSE TIME LIMITS by Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval & Santa Fe), passed the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee, while another pro-gun bill from Rep. Lord, H.B. 279 failed on a vote of 3-2 to table it.

H.B. 306 bill will require the Department of Public Safety “to issue or deny an application for a concealed handgun license no more than 90 days after receiving a completed application and to renew a license no more than 60 days after a license submits a renewal request.”

Happening Today: 

SENATE HEALTH AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
Senator Gerald Ortiz y Pino, Chair, convenes Monday, February 22 – 30 minutes after floor session (which is scheduled to convene at 11:30 a.m.)  

*Times are subject to change depending on the Senate floor schedule. Join the meeting here: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89738905182 

S.B. 227 –  INSPECTION OF POLICE MISCONDUCT INVESTIGATIONSen. Linda Lopez (D-Bernalillo) – BAD 

This bill is opposed by the Bernalillo County Deputy Sheriffs Association and the New Mexico State Police Association. It adds crippling restrictions on law enforcement and adds strict reporting criteria which does nothing by penalize law enforcers for simply carrying out their duties. Included in the bill are restrictions, such as the following:

“A law enforcement officer shall not use a chokehold. J. A law enforcement officer shall not discharge tear gas or other chemical weapons. K. A law enforcement officer shall not discharge rubber pellets from a propulsion device. L. A law enforcement officer shall not direct a dog to bite a person.” This is an anti-law enforcement bill, which takes critical tools away from officers, which would leave them defenseless while barring them from doing the very job they took an oath to carry out: protect and defend communities. 

According to far-left fringe groups, this bill is the “strongest in the nation” in terms of limits to local and state law enforcement. The bill’s supporters have spent countless dark money dollars from out-of-state lobbying for this anti-police bill, which would make it the most radical in the nation. 

Haaland confirmation hanging by a thread as GOP reveals her radicalism

On Tuesday, Rep. Deb Haaland spoke in front of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in her first confirmation hearing to be U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) secretary.

However, during the committee, her extreme left-wing agenda was picked apart by even the most moderate senators in the committee, angered by the Biden administration’s assault on fossil fuels energy.

Despite claiming in her opening statement that “fossil energy does and will continue to play a major role in America for years to come. I know how important oil and gas revenues are… critical services, but we must also recognize that the energy industry is innovating and our climate challenge must be addressed.” 

Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY) challenged Haaland on her previous comment claiming “Republicans don’t believe in science,” asking her if she truly believed GOP senators, especially him as a doctor, rejects science. “If you’re a doctor, I would assume you believe in science.” Barrasso clapped back, “It’s a concern of us here today.” 

Also, her comments about her desire to ban “stop all gas and oil leasing on federal and public lands” if she “had her way.” 

When Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) challenged Haaland on presidential authority regarding public lands, she tried to change the subject, talking about Lee’s home state’s natural resources. “Senator, I want to say, um, I’m, I’m a little jealous that you’re from Utah and I’m from New Mexico because I know you have so much beautiful land there and a lot of history. I’ve been to Bears Ears, and the Pueblo Indians’ ancestral homeland is there, and I realize it covers a very wide space.” Lee did not take kindly to her pandering.

Even moderate Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) took offense to Biden’s singling out of Alaska in his extreme “climate change” proposals. She said, “Why is this administration out to get us?” Haaland responded, “I want you to know that if I’m confirmed, I will rely heavily on our relationship moving forward.” 

During Sen. Martin Heinrich’s (D-NM) commentary on Haaland, he defended Joe Biden’s extreme job-killing anti-energy policies, which Haaland would champion at DOI. He said. “

“We have not lost thousands of jobs in the oil and gas sector in New Mexico because there is no ban and because the industry stockpiled an enormous number of leases under the fire sale that Secretary Berhardt had at the end of the last administration. However, I want to say we do recognize that we will need to move to a fully decarbonized economy. And frankly, pretending that isn’t going to happen is not going to serve any of our workers well. I would submit that our energy workers would be best served if those of us on this committee show leadership by both investing in energy communities that have put us where we are today and in the technologies necessary to actively manage this transition.”

The meeting adjourned until Wednesday at 9:00 a.m. ET, where it is uncertain if Haaland will be successfully confirmed. Sen. Manchin, the chairman of the committee, shoed hesitate in supporting Haaland’s nomination, which garnered shade from socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, where she blasted him for his vote to confirm the former Attorney General Jeff Sessions:

Call these senators on the fence asking them to oppose Haaland’s nomination:

CHAIRMAN — Sen Joe Manchin (D-WV) 202-224-3954 — EXTREMELY important 

Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-CO) 202-224-5941

Sen. Mark Kelly (D-AZ) 202-224-2235

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-LA) (202) 224-5824

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) (202)-224-6665 — EXTREMELY important 

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) is also on the committee, however, he has pledged to vote for Haaland. Feel free to call his office anyway and share your dissatisfaction: (202) 224-5521

Legislative Update: GOP vaccine exemption bill advances, ‘red flag’ update bill heads to House floor

On Monday, many consequential bills were heard in New Mexico House and Senate committees, with some bad bills advancing, while one good bill advanced as well. Read our briefing below about these bills considered Monday and committees you can join on Tuesday. 

H.B. 9 was considered in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee on Monday. The bill would be the second phase of Gov. Lujan Grisham’s “Green New Deal” seeks to force extreme carbon emission requirements on all sectors with a “net-zero” carbon emission standard by 2050, the same timeline as the federal “Green New Deal” and the “Energy Transition Act” passed in 2019. Most of the bill’s supporters came from areas most affected by the extreme bill, such as natural resources-rich areas of the state. The opposition was mainly “community organizers” with far-out dark money groups and law firms that would benefit off of all the litigation involved in the passage of this bill. H.B. 9 was rolled over to a committee vote on Wednesday.  

H.B. 110, a bill sponsored by Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Bernalillo) sought to raise the minimum wage to $12 by 2022 and $15 by 2024. The bill was heard in the Commerce and Economic Development Committee, however, it was not voted on or tabled. Rep. Roybal Caballero brought in an “expert witness,” Pameyla Herndon, to field questions about the bill. Herndon bragged in a 2020 Democrat fundraising call about ballot harvesting votes from senior citizens. 

Members of the committee commented on the bill, most notably Rep. Javier Martinez (D-Bernalilo) who went on a tangent about how he wanted to create a “universal basic income” through entitlements. 

“We need to reimagine the way we do public benefits. Ims tartgin to work around the concept of a universal basic income, for example, instead of putting as much as we do into these public benefits programs that, you know, for the last fifty years I think have been a safety net for many families, a very much needed safety net. But one could argue that they haven’t in some—in most cases—succeeded in uplifting people, with some exceptions, right? There’s always the story of me. ‘I did it.’ But generally speaking, we haven’t seen that transition of using a safety net into a better place…. I think until we reimagine that system, we still have the problem of if you’re —under hte current law by 2022, by 2025 youll get bumped three dollars. Will that impact your public benefits at that point? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn’t but it’s something to think about.”  

H.B. 193 sponsored by Reps. Daymon Ely (D-Bernalillo) and Joy Garratt (D-Bernalillo), which seeks to expand the extreme “Red Flag” law passed in 2020, was heard in the House Judiciary Committee, where it passed the committee on party lines. Far-left extremist Sheriff Kim Stewart (D-Doña Ana) lauded the bill during the committee hearing. 

Many people spoke in opposition, with many arguments arguing its unconstitutionality defiant to the 4th Amendment regarding unlawful search and seizure. Multiple people from fringe anti-gun groups such as “Everytown” and “Moms Demand Action” supported the anti-gun unconstitutional measure. It passed the committee on a party-line vote of 8-4. 

Another anti-gun bill, H.B. 166 which sought to criminalize the creation and possession of multiple firearms and components was rolled over to a future hearing in the committee. 

S.B. 232 sponsored by Sen. Gregg Schmedes, M.D. (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe & Torrance) sought to give parents the ability to refuse a vaccination for their child based on conscientious objections to the vaccine. The bill was considered in the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee. Most of the public was in support of the measure, while most of the opposition claimed its passage would put more individuals at risk due to fewer vaccinations. Sen. Schmedes made a commonsense case for the bill, which was able to garner the support of one Democrat, Sen. Antoinette Sedillo-Lopez (D-Bernalillo), resulting in the bill’s passage on a vote of 4-3. 

Tuesday Committee Hearings:

SENATOR ELIZABETH STEFANICS, CHAIR Convenes Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 9:00 a.m. via Zoom

Please click here to register for public comment on a bill being heard by this committee: https://forms.gle/5pgx2bgxGyHEDeCS8

S.B. 312 GAME & FISH & WILDLIFE CHANGES by Sen. Jeff Steinborn (D-Doña Ana) and Rep. Nathan Small (D-Doña Ana). – BAD

S.B. 312 is a costly bill that takes power away from the people and gives it to the government, according to liberals, giving “wildlife conservation” a “modern approach to wildlife management. It directs the state to manage and conserve the public’s wildlife.” This power-grab would mean higher permit prices for many out-of-state permits, harsher restrictions on what wildlife one could hunt, and it would rename the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish to the “Department of Wildlife Conservation.” 

While the Piñon Post supports conservation efforts in our state, this 241-page overhaul bill further bureaucratizes the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish and according to the bill itself, “[narrows] conditions for landowners on taking or killing animals on private land.” That means, in part, that it usurps the right for landowners to kill a wild animal on their land, for reasons of immediate threats to human life and for damage of property, including crops, it would now only allow killing the animal for the threat to human life. This would be required to be reported to the Department within 24 hours of disposal of the carcass. 

These burdensome restrictions, among countless other flaws in the bill, such as a large appropriation necessary for its passage, are a detriment to taxpayers, landowners, and hunters in the state. Read the fiscal impact report on the bill for more information.

SENATE TAX, BUSINESS AND TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
SENATOR BENNY SHENDO JR., CHAIRMAN Tuesday, February 23, 2021, 1:30 pm 

*For Public Participation send an email to SCORC@nmlegis.gov with: Name, Entity Representing, Bill #, For or Against, and email address by Feb. 23, at 10 am. You will be contacted by our Zoom Operator with virtual meeting instructions.

S.B. 11 (as amended) CLEAN FUEL STANDARD ACT by Sen. Mimi Stewart (D-Bernalillo) and Nathan Small (D-Doña Ana) – BAD (This is one of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s legislative priorities).

This anti-business bill put forth by two anti-energy extremist legislators, would in the bill sponsors’ own words, “[require] fuel providers that refine, blend, make or import fuel used in New Mexico to gradually reduce the carbon intensity of the transportation fuel itself, we can reduce emissions by 4.7 million metric tons in carbon dioxide equivalent by 2040. That’s like taking 44,000 cars off the road every year for 15 years.” 

This bill would harm critical industries in New Mexico with expensive and punitive new regulations on the transportation of the fuels New Mexicans rely on to keep them driving and doing business. This bill has an appropriation of $1,210,000 for the 2022 fiscal year alone, with it gradually increasing annually. 

HOUSE CONSUMER AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
ELIZABETH “LIZ” THOMSON, CHAIR, Convenes Tuesday, February 23, 2021 – 1:30 p.m. – Zoom

H.B. 254 – USE OF DEADLY FORCE REPORTING by Sen. Antoinette Sedillo-Lopez (D-Bernalillo) and Rep. Patricia Roybal Caballero (D-Bernalillo) – BAD

Note: both of these women are running for Congress in CD-1. This is the House version of the Senate’s S.B. 274. 

According to the bill, “Within twenty-four hours of a person suffering great bodily harm or death as a result of a peace officer’s actions, the sheriff or the chief of police of the jurisdiction in which the great bodily harm or death occurred shall report the great bodily harm or death in writing to the district attorney of the judicial district in which the great bodily harm or death occurred. The sheriff or chief of police shall report all instances of suspected great bodily harm to the appropriate district attorney, even if a more thorough assessment of great bodily harm will be undertaken at a later date,” 

The bill would put undue suspicion of wrongdoing on the part of the law enforcement officer, overburdening local sheriffs and district attorneys, while not trusting police officers to carry forth their duties. 

H.B. 279 NO GOV. RESTRICTIONS ON GUN & AMMO STORES sponsored by Rep. Stefani Lord would do the following, according to the fiscal impact report: 

“Eliminate the governor’s current authority during a state of emergency to prohibit the possession of firearms or any other deadly weapon in any place other than a person’s residence or business; and  Prohibit the governor during a state of emergency from restricting the operations of firearm manufacturers, distributors, suppliers and sellers, the sale or transportation of firearms, the operations of shooting ranges, or the operations of businesses that provide firearm instruction.” 

This bill is pro-Second Amendment and it helps limit the Governor’s power, making it a bill supported by the Piñon Post. – GOOD.

Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89243737297 Or iPhone one-tap : US: +16699009128,,89243737297# or +12532158782,,89243737297# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 9128 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 Webinar ID: 892 4373 7297

EXCLUSIVE: NM radicals target GOP Rep. Stefani Lord—She fires back

Over the weekend, the Santa Fe New Mexican shamefully picked up a political hit by a vague group claiming to be “leaders of Black communities and organizations in New Mexico,” claiming that state Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval & Santa Fe) and another lawmaker in the Senate had used coded racist language and “overtly racist conduct” to denigrate African Americans in the NM Roundhouse.

The statement from the group also says, “The conduct of these legislators is reflective of a systemic lack of unbiased reverence and respect for Black women and Black people in general.”

According to the Santa Fe New Mexican:

Also earlier this month, Rep. Stefani Lord, R-Sandia Park, called to consult law enforcement during a committee hearing in response to Alexandria Taylor’s description of her research into House Bill 156, which prescribes felony charges for police officers accused of sexually assaulting people in custody.

Lord asked Taylor, deputy director of the New Mexico Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs, if she had spoken with law enforcement about the bill.

“I have had conversations with law enforcement officers about this bill and those who I spoke with who are not harming members of the public did not have an issue with this bill because they are not raping members of the community,” Taylor said.

Lord said she had spoken to law enforcement officers who opposed the bill without being guilty of sexual assault. While explaining her vote against the bill, Lord called an unnamed law enforcement officer.

“When you call the sheriff during a committee hearing because you don’t like the all-too-real narrative of misconduct among law enforcement officers, you’re not making a stand with law enforcement,” New Mexico Black Leadership Council member Mason Graham said at a news conference organized by the nonprofit Saturday morning.

Lord defended the phone call as standard procedure.

“I sought outside counsel and asked them, ‘Is this already a law?’ The phone call was nothing more,” Lord said in a telephone interview Saturday.

The accusation against Rep. Lord is clearly absurd, especially given that none of the news outlets running this story have bothered to share the video of the committee hearing which you can watch HERE. She released the following statement:

As some of you may have noticed, a group of left-wing activists got fed up with me challenging their radicalism in legislative committee meetings. Without any evidence, they have decided to call me a “racist,” which is the word the Left uses whenever it wants to silence someone putting up a fight. Well, I won’t be silenced by accusations made without ANY evidence. 

Furthermore, shame on the Santa Fe New Mexican for publishing BASELESS rumors without even bothering to contact the accused for comments. We need good journalism in this country, but given how far standards have fallen, it’s no wonder the majority of citizens can’t trust their newspapers. 

At the end of the day, these activists are attacking me for defending law enforcement officials from the slander and attacks that they continuously have to endure. When our law enforcement is unjustly slandered, our communities suffer. I will proudly continue to stand up for ALL my constituents’ rights, including those in law enforcement.

NM House committee rolls over vote on MLG’s Green New Deal 2.0 to Wednesday

On Monday, the House of Representatives Committee on Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee rolled over the corrosive anti-energy bill, H.B. 9, to Wednesday morning after much testimony from the public and many questions from the committee. The bill would force extreme carbon emission requirements on all sectors, the second phase of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s “Energy Transition Act,” which set harsh “net-zero” standards by 2050 for the electricity sector. 

The bill’s sponsors, Reps. Melanie Stansbury (D-Bernalillo) and Angelica Rubio (D-Doña Ana) introduced the legislation as a desperate measure required to stop “climate change,” which they claimed created “drought, extreme fire, and impacts to agriculture and water supplies,” which are untrue statements not backed up by science.

Here is the Piñon Post assessment of the bill:

According to the fiscal impact report (FIR) on the bill, it “establishes a climate leadership council, deadlines for the state to achieve specific reductions in greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE), requirements for state agencies to achieve GHGE reductions, and a number of definitions related to climate, economic development, and socioeconomic equity.” 

The FIR also states that the bill “[r]equires New Mexico to reduce statewide GHGE by least 50 percent below 2005 levels by 2030 and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050” and “[m]andates a 60 percent reduction, relative to 2005 levels, in emissions of methane, carbon dioxide, and volatile organic compounds from the oil and gas sector by 2030.”  Note, the “net-zero” emission standard mirrors U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal,” the most radical and costly proposal in U.S. history to decimate the energy industry.

Opponents of the bill included workers in the energy and agriculture industries who keep the lights on and feed communities. Supporters of the bill mostly from the dark money groups CAFé, OLÉ, the Sierra Club, among others who self-identified as “community organizers.” One individual from extremist group OLÉ claimed “climate change” was a “racial justice issue,” saying “Black, indigenous, and people of color” somehow are disproportionately affected by the fictitious issue. The dark money groups also exploited children named “Alex” and “Adrian,” who were given scripts in the supposed attempt to pull heartstrings, claiming pine trees in the state would disappear. “Will there still be pine trees when I grow up?” asked one. 

Although the committee chair, Rep. Georgene Louis (D-Bernalillo), claimed to give both sides equal time, proponents of the bill were given more time to testify. 

Rep. Greg Nibert (Chaves & Lincoln) asked multiple questions regarding Native American tribes complying with these strict standards, asking if they were required to comply with these mandates. The condescending witness, Noah Long of the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), said that the Navajo Nation was not subject to it.

When asked about how the bill would bring opportunity to the state, Rep. Rubio went on the defensive, saying, “The fact that it’s still being questioned of whether or not it is something that we need to continue, it minimizes the work being done in communities around the state.” 

Nibert said, “You said it’s a roadmap to diversify the economy….In case you changed it drastically, I don’t see a roadmap there. I see a statement that says “the state shall create economic inclusion opportunity,” which I believe is high-road employment — and so I don’t see a roadmap, and I don’t see how the state is going to create those jobs.”  

“The economy doesn’t create jobs. The people that decide to take risks — They create jobs. The people who decide to produce something — they take a risk…. It’s people who create jobs. It’s not the state. The economy is simply an indication of how well things are going from a standpoint of job-creation and… compensation to employees and standard of living. That’s the economy. I see a lot of words here, but at the end of the day, it’s not your attempt that the state shall create those economic including opportunities. It’s basically you want to set up a framework for which these things are studied, and you hope that people will take risks and see opportunities to use their capital to start a business, expand a business and create additional employment,” Nibert added.

Regarding a question from Nibert about litigation costs of the legislation, Rep. Stansbury claimed that “if consideration of climate change had been included [in Texas], perhaps we may have avoided the shutdown of electricity and water for millions of people” in the state to New Mexico’s east. When Nibert pressed her on her assertion about Texas’ recent crisis with a snowstorm, however, Stansbury retreated, claiming she wanted to comment on “the scope” of her bill. 

Nibert commented that during the harsh storm that affected New Mexico with multiple inches of snow. “The lights in Santa Fe were on because the San Juan Generating Plant had not been shut down yet.” 

The bill’s final vote in the committee has been rolled over to Wednesday morning’s committee hearing.

Scroll to Top