News

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 »

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 »

‘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.

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

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. 

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

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.

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

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. 

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

NM bill would criminalize multiple firearms and components

3 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, state Rep. Tara Lujan (D-Santa Fe) filed House Bill 166, which would criminalize the ownership and manufacture of multiple types of guns. 

The legislation would add to the New Mexico Criminal Code language making it a felony for anyone to manufacture, “produce or otherwise assemble” a firearm “unless that person is a federally licensed gun dealer or manufacturer” and anyone who possesses, sells, transfers, or purchases such a firearm would be made a felon as well. 

It would also make anyone who uses a three-dimensional printer or similar device to “manufacture or produce a firearm or firearm component unless that person is a federally licensed gun dealer or manufacturer.” All sales, transfers, and purchases of such a device would also be subject to a felony. 

Even the dissemination or creation of digital instructions on how to manufacture a 3D-printed firearm component would be a felony. As well, the bill criminalizes any sale or manufacture of “covert” firearms made from a “kit, a firearm frame or receiver that is not imprinted with a serial number registered with a federally licensed gun manufacturer unless that person is a federally licensed gun dealer or manufacturer.” 

The New Mexico Shooting Sports Association has already voiced its opposition to the bill. The organization released the following statement: 

In just-filed 2021 HB166, Representative Lujan from Santa Fe wants to make it a felony in New Mexico to manufacture or possess a firearm made from an unfinished receiver, a firearm made at home in any fashion, or a firearm that includes any components manufactured on a 3D printer not owned by a FFL. This would include firearms made from an 80% lower receiver.

If you already own such a firearm, this bill would make you a felon for doing so. If any component of any firearm you own was manufactured on a 3D printer, this bill would make you a felon. The bill would even make it a felony to provide code for making a firearm component on a 3D printer to anyone in New Mexico.

We are opposed to this legislation and will keep you updated on its progress.

The bill has been referred to the New Mexico House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC) for consideration. Those who would like to reach out to their representative to ask them to oppose the measure can find them here. HCPAC members can be contacted here.

NM bill would criminalize multiple firearms and components Read More »

NM Senate committee approves abortion up-to-birth bill in 5-3 vote

10 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, the New Mexico Senate Health & Public Affairs Committee held a hearing on SB-10, the abortion up-to-birth and infanticide bill proposed by Sens. Linda Lopez (D-Bernalillo) and Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe). 

The Committee resumed its business shortly after 3:00 p.m. following a slew of technical issues where some senators could not log onto the virtual meeting, the audio wasn’t working at one point for the chairman, Sen. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, who said “I can’t hear a damn thing,” and an influx of New Mexicans tuning in caused the system to lapse. 

However, once the technical issues were finally resolved, the Committee began its proceedings, introducing the bicameral bill and its sponsors. Sen. Lopez said of her bill, which would strip away all protections for women, doctors, and babies, that “We must respect and support those who support such a decision and must take politics and the law out of” abortion despite her own sponsorship of the bill seems to put politics into the conversation.

Sen. Wirth noted how he was “honored” to support the anti-life bill. He read off a few canned talking points, claiming the current law, dormant due to Roe v. Wade, is “archaic” and that he “respects” the decisions of New Mexico women to kill their children in the womb.

Rep. Micaela Cadena, a co-sponsor of the abortion bill in the House, said during the committee that she understands “pregnancy is sacred, and as such, we must trust a woman, a pregnant person” to make the decision to abort. 

During the proceedings, New Mexicans on each side of the issue were allowed to speak in support or in opposition to the bill for increments of 30 minutes on each side, during which doctors, midwives, nurses, post-abortive women, and mothers spoke on the pro-life side. Multiple activists and “social justice” lawyers spoke in favor of the bill on the pro-abortion side.

Sen. Gregg Schmedes (R-Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe) repeatedly asked the bill sponsors why the bill had stripped away conscience protections away from the bill, despite the previous 2019 version of the bill adding an amendment to explicitly protect health care professionals from being forced to abort children. Sen. Wirth could not answer that question, claiming as a lawyer the bill did not need that explicit conscientious objection clause. Wirth also admitted that the bill would not only allow non-physicians to perform abortions but that the dangerous practice is already happening in New Mexico. 

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) legal expert that Democrats brought in to testify in support of the bill, Ellie Rushforth, could not answer basic questions from Sen. David Gallegos (R-Eddy and Lea) regarding if a healthy mother could abort a healthy baby in the State of New Mexico. The witness dodged the questions, saying, “These are very complex medical decisions.” that they could not answer. 

The Bill ultimately passed the Committee on a party-line vote of 5-3, with Democrat Sens. Gerald Ortiz y Pino, Bill Tallman, Brenda McKenna, Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, and Liz Stefanics voting for the abortion up-to-birth measure. Republican Sens. Gregg Schmedes, David Gallegos, and Stuart Ingle voted against it. 

The bill now moves to consideration before the entire New Mexico Senate, where Democrats believe they have the votes to ram it through. New Mexicans are advised to contact their state senators to vote against the bill when it is brought up to the Senate floor. The name of your senator and their contact information can be found here.

The whole committee hearing can be viewed here. 

NM Senate committee approves abortion up-to-birth bill in 5-3 vote Read More »

1 … 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 … 215

Stay Updated

Scroll to Top