Opinion

Dems now victim-blaming NM Republicans after firebombing hate crime

23 Comments / Editorial, New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In a show of complete shamelessness, New Mexico Democrats are blaming the victims — the New Mexico Republican Party and GOP officials — for being the target of a violent arson attack that blew up the entranceway to the Albuquerque headquarters. Rather than condemning the political violence outright, Democrats are inflaming tensions and inciting further hostility by recklessly targeting GOP leaders like Reps. John Block (R-Alamogordo), Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park), and Republican Party Chairwoman Amy Barela. Their dangerous and provably false rhetoric not only undermines the gravity of the violence but also puts these officials at direct risk.

While the FBI and ATF investigate the fire as a suspected arson — with fire-starting materials recovered from the scene — Democrat leaders have chosen to escalate, not de-escalate. State Democrats issued a press release loaded with inflammatory claims, including the absurd accusation that Republican lawmakers had been part of a crowd “calling for murder.” Not only is this untrue, it’s libelous, as pointed out by Rep. Lord. 

Rep. John Block — who is the editor and founder of the Piñon Post —was not even present at the event in question, and despite repeated attempts by Democrats to link him to the January 6 Capitol incursion, he never set foot inside or near the building nor participated in any violence. His presence at a peaceful rally attended by 53,000+ other peaceful Trump supporters — miles from the Capitol steps — appears to be another tired and debunked attempt to tie him to violence.

Chairwoman Amy Barela made clear during a Monday press conference: “This was not just an attack on our building. This was an attack on our values, our free speech, and the right of every New Mexican that wants to participate in the democratic process without fear.” She also revealed to Fox News that the targeted attack was being investigated as a hate crime.

But instead of standing with those under threat, Democrats doubled down. Congresswoman Teresa Leger Fernandez, whose words to “legislate, litigate, agitate” were cited by Republicans as dangerously timed mere hours before the firebombing, dismissed concerns with shocking callousness. 

In comments to KOB 4, she accused Republicans of hypocrisy for condemning violence instead of apologizing for her call to “agitate,” claiming, “It’s ludicrous to have Republicans, who themselves have participated in violent protests, to accuse me of inciting violence.” She added, “We actually passed the sign of peace” at her town hall — an empty gesture in light of the inflammatory language she used just before the GOP headquarters went up in flames.

Leger Fernandez’s attempt to turn the blame onto Rep. Block — lying that he was involved in violent protests — further inflames the situation and spreads outright disinformation. These reckless allegations endanger GOP leaders by portraying them as instigators of violence when, in reality, they have consistently and unequivocally condemned it, including the January 6 unrest.

Instead of answering the call to stand above the violence they have inflamed, Democrats released a memorandum weaponizing the tragedy to smear GOP leaders with fabricated associations to extremism, referencing long-debunked connections and even citing the crimes of individuals wholly unrelated to the party’s current leadership. The memo accuses Chairwoman Barela of turning a blind eye to extremism simply because she has appeared in photos with GOP figures like Voice of America chief Kari Lake and Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene — a clear attempt at guilt by association rather than substantive critique.

Rep. Stefani Lord called the Democratic Party’s allegations “libelous,” and Sen. Nicole Tobiassen said their claims are “desperate.”

In the face of a violent attack, New Mexico Republicans have called for unity, calm, and a return to civility. Democrats, however, have responded with personal attacks, misinformation, and what amounts to political gaslighting — accusing their opponents of the very behaviors they themselves are fueling.

Rather than take responsibility for inflaming tensions, Rep. Leger Fernandez and her allies are engaging in dangerous victim-blaming — further endangering those already under attack. If Democrats genuinely oppose political violence, they should begin by ceasing the kind of reckless rhetoric that invites it.

Dems now victim-blaming NM Republicans after firebombing hate crime Read More »

How DEI is lowering NM legal standards and putting justice at risk

15 Comments / Editorial, New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Tuesday, the all-Democrat New Mexico Supreme Court issued a statement reaffirming its commitment to Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) within the judicial system. The Court framed its stance as a necessity for upholding justice, citing its duty to “eliminate barriers” and ensure “equal access” for all individuals, regardless of race, gender, or other demographic factors. While these ideals may sound noble, the actual implementation of DEI initiatives has proven to be deeply flawed, often undermining the very principles of equal justice and meritocracy that courts should uphold.

DEI: A Shift Away From Equal Justice

The core principle of the American legal system is that justice should be blind—meaning that every individual, regardless of their background, should be treated equally under the law. However, DEI inherently prioritizes group identity over individual merit. By emphasizing race, gender, and other identity markers in decision-making, DEI initiatives risk replacing the ideal of impartial justice with an ideological agenda.

For instance, the Supreme Court of New Mexico’s emphasis on inclusivity efforts directly conflicts with the core principle engraved above their own courtroom: “Equal Justice Under Law.” True equality before the law requires neutrality, not policies that introduce preferential treatment under the guise of “equity.”

Unintended Consequences: Lowering Standards and Promoting Division

One major flaw of DEI programs in the legal system is their impact on professional and educational standards. DEI-driven hiring and promotion policies in law schools, courts, and judicial appointments have been criticized for lowering qualifications in favor of demographic representation rather than competency. This diminishes public trust in the system and creates an environment where judges and legal professionals are perceived as political appointees rather than objective arbiters of the law.

Furthermore, DEI programs often foster resentment and division rather than unity. By continually emphasizing group identity over shared legal principles, such programs risk deepening societal fractures rather than healing them. Multiple studies have shown that workplaces and institutions with aggressive DEI policies often experience greater racial tension, as people are categorized based on identity rather than shared goals or common values.

Legal and Ethical Concerns: DEI vs. Federal Law

Additionally, some DEI mandates may directly conflict with federal anti-discrimination laws. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 explicitly prohibits discrimination based on race or gender in employment and education. Yet many DEI-driven policies—including hiring quotas, admissions preferences, and mandatory diversity training—operate in a way that explicitly prioritizes race and gender, often at the expense of others. This raises serious constitutional concerns and has led to increasing legal challenges against DEI programs nationwide.

Conclusion: A Dangerous Precedent in the Judiciary

While the New Mexico Supreme Court frames DEI as a tool for fairness, it is ultimately a departure from the foundational principles of American law. Instead of ensuring equal justice, DEI initiatives insert ideology into the judicial system, threatening fairness, public trust, and legal neutrality. If true equality is the goal, the judiciary should reject identity-based policies and uphold merit, fairness, and impartiality—values that are rapidly being eroded under the guise of “inclusion.”

How DEI is lowering NM legal standards and putting justice at risk Read More »

Week 3: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block

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

A legislative update from Piñon Post founder and editor and state Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo). John gives a weekly update during the legislative session. If you don’t already get the update, you can get it here or by subscribing on the website JohnForNM.com.

This week has been another wild one at the Roundhouse. Here’s what happened:

To watch my summary of what happened this week, please click here or on the thumbnail below, and you can follow along in the video with the below information:

On Monday, in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee (HGEIAC), I voted against an extremist resolution (H.J.R. 3), also known as the “Gren Amendment. ” The bill would make cities and counties liable and open to lawsuits if anyone perceives air or water as not being “clean. ” According to the bill’s fiscal impact report, the state and localities could be exposed to up to $1.6 billion in frivolous litigation.

On Tuesday, in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC), the committee voted unanimously to pass H.B. 73, which removes statutes of limitations on child sexual abuse civil cases, and H.B. 83, which increases penalties for sex trafficking (and increases ages in the statutes from 16 to 18 to ensure kids up to 18 are protected). I voted against H.B. 89, which lets illegal immigrants get graduate-level scholarships at UNM. A bill sponsored by myself and Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) to institute Constitutional Carry was tabled on a 4-2 vote without discussion from the Democrats on the committee.

On Wednesday, Democrats passed through HGEIAC H.B. 98, which automatically expunges eviction records after five years (which will give landlords less information, especially if the eviction was due to violence, damage, or other grave circumstances), and H.B. 108, establishing “the Statewide Public Health and Climate Program within the Department of Health,” both of which I opposed.

On Thursday, Rep. Lord and I helped pass bills through HCPAC to give police officers equal rights as civilians (H.B. 103) and allow law enforcement to carry firearms at polling places (H.B. 101).

On Friday, in HGEIAC, H.B. 16, to implement “increased sentencing for individuals convicted of trafficking controlled substances under Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978 when the offense involves fentanyl,” passed the committee despite three Democrats opposing the measure.

On Saturday, I bounced between my two committees (which were inconveniently meeting at the same time). Democrats killed bills in HCPAC to increase penalties for drug traffickers (H.B. 107), including resulting in death from trafficked drugs and adding “fentanyl to methamphetamine, where now knowing or intentional exposure to either of these two drugs [to children] would represent prima facie evidence of child abuse” (H.B. 136).

In HGEIAC on that day, Democrats passed H.J.R. 5, which changes the Children, Youth, and Families Department to a commission under the governor and legislative branches, but it does not equally distribute representation, so I voted against it. Another bill I voted against in that committee was H.B. 6, which forces a “prevailing wage” on projects done through industrial revenue bonds (IRBs), which would skyrocket the cost of these projects (which are funded by private dollars anyway).

The week ahead will be very eventful in my committees, with lots of bad bills scheduled for the upcoming week. And nightly floor sessions are also scheduled to begin hearing legislation on the floor, so please be on the alert for those as well.

Here are the legislative items that will come to the committees I am a member of:

To see all committee schedules for all committees and the House/Senate floors, click here.

Click here to see the latest committee calendar, which includes Zoom links to testify.

To access all of my proposed legislation and the status of each bill, please click here.

It is an honor to represent Alamogordo in the Legislature. I will fight to protect our constitutional rights with every fiber of my being. You can always count on me to support our shared conservative American values.

God bless you,
John

Rep. John Block
NM House District 51
Republican, Otero County

Week 3: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block Read More »

Luján humiliates himself during RFK, Jr. confirmation hearing

26 Comments / Editorial, New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In a trainwreck of a question and answer session during the confirmation hearing for Robert F. Kennedy Jr., President Donald Trump’s pick for U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, Sen. Ben Ray Luján (D-NM), found himself stumbling through a misguided line of questioning that once again showcased his lack of understanding of federal departments and legislative authority. The hearing, which took place before the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee, saw Luján trying and failing to corner Kennedy on Medicaid policy, only to be corrected in real-time by the nominee himself.

Luján, a senator who has made a habit of attempting — and failing — to stump Trump officials on issues outside of their purview, asked Kennedy whether he would cut Medicaid if President Trump requested it. Keeping his composure, Kennedy responded by pointing out the obvious: “Oh, it’s not up to me to cut Medicaid. It would be up to Congress.” The blunt correction left Luján momentarily flustered before he attempted to brush past his embarrassing blunder with an awkward laugh and a hasty retreat: “Mr. Kennedy, you don’t want to answer? I’ll move on.” But the damage was done, and his credibility took yet another hit.

This isn’t the first time Luján has exposed his lack of knowledge of Medicaid and its oversight. In a previous hearing, he tried to corner Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent with a similar question about the federal healthcare program, only to be reminded that Medicaid falls under the jurisdiction of Congress—not the Treasury Department. Rather than learning from his mistake, Luján appears to have doubled down on his ignorance, now directing his confusion at the incoming HHS secretary, whose role in Medicaid funding decisions is also limited.

Kennedy’s confirmation hearing was already bound to be contentious, given his independent streak and willingness to challenge establishment narratives on public health policy. Democrats, desperate to discredit him, have tried everything from smearing his record to attempting to trip him up with irrelevant gotcha questions. However, Luján’s fumbling performance only served to highlight the unserious nature of Democrat opposition to Kennedy’s appointment. Rather than engaging in substantive debate about Kennedy’s policies, Luján resorted to ill-prepared theatrics that only embarrassed himself.

Sen. Luján’s political career has long been propped up by nepotism rather than merit. The son of former New Mexico House Speaker Ben Luján, he has ridden his father’s political coattails his entire career. Rather than earning his way through legislative accomplishment or deep policy knowledge, Luján has consistently relied on the family name to ascend through the ranks of New Mexico’s Democrat machine. His latest misstep before the entire Senate further proves that he is in way over his head.

As Kennedy’s nomination moves forward, it remains clear that the Biden/Harris-era Democrat Party has little substance to offer in their opposition. Instead, they continue to flail through hearings, desperately searching for a moment to damage Trump’s picks but only succeeding in humiliating themselves. Sen. Luján’s latest faceplant is just another example of the intellectual bankruptcy plaguing Washington Democrats as they desperately cling to power in the face of Trump’s decisive leadership.

Luján humiliates himself during RFK, Jr. confirmation hearing Read More »

Dems’ 2025 legislative preview: Alcohol tax hike, woke policies, CYFD neglect

8 Comments / Editorial / By

As New Mexico’s legislative session nears, Democrat lawmakers are championing a slate of policies under the guise of public safety and behavioral health. However, these proposals threaten to harm the very communities they claim to help, deepen government dependency, and distract from pressing issues like the long-standing crisis within the Children, Youth, and Families Department (CYFD).

Alcohol Tax Hikes: A Step Toward Modern-Day Prohibition

Democratic lawmakers are once again pushing for higher taxes on alcohol despite evidence that such policies disproportionately harm the state’s poorest residents. The latest “hybrid” proposal seeks to combine increased wholesale taxes with a new 12% retail tax, which would drive up prices across the board, particularly for consumers in low-income brackets. Proponents, such as House Speaker Javier Martínez, D-Albuquerque, argue the move will reduce alcohol-related deaths, yet similar measures have historically failed to achieve meaningful results.

Raising alcohol prices effectively punishes responsible consumers and mirrors the prohibition-era mindset of legislating personal behavior. Instead of addressing root causes like addiction treatment and education, Democrats are targeting taxpayers to fund their schemes, diverting attention from solutions that could empower individuals rather than penalize them. This approach not only burdens working families but also risks fueling an underground market for alcohol, exacerbating the very public health crises lawmakers claim to solve.

Woke Behavioral Health Plans Masquerading as Public Safety

House Democrats have also unveiled plans to pour hundreds of millions of dollars into so-called behavioral health initiatives, framing them as public safety measures. These initiatives include providing state-funded housing, food, and other unmentionables for individuals battling addiction under the guise of “managed alcohol programs.” Such policies, popularized in Canada, enable addiction rather than confront it, creating a cycle of dependency where the government perpetuates, rather than alleviates, suffering.

Instead of enforcing accountability and implementing meaningful reforms to tackle crime and addiction, Democrats seem intent on expanding the welfare state. Public safety measures should focus on holding offenders accountable, protecting communities, and addressing the root causes of crime—not subsidizing destructive behaviors at taxpayers’ expense.

Democrat Inaction on CYFD: A History of Stalled Reform

While pushing these controversial policies, Democrats have failed year after year to address the critical failings of CYFD. This embattled department, responsible for safeguarding New Mexico’s most vulnerable children, has been plagued by allegations of mismanagement and systemic dysfunction. Efforts to establish an independent Office of the Child Advocate to oversee CYFD have repeatedly been blocked by Democratic lawmakers, who appear more concerned with protecting the status quo than ensuring transparency and accountability.

House Speaker Javier Martínez’s admission that CYFD is “broken” rings hollow when Democrats continue to stymie reform efforts. Their opposition to creating an independent ombudsman’s office, which would provide critical oversight, underscores a lack of political will to prioritize children’s safety. Instead of fixing CYFD, lawmakers are content to throw more money at the department without addressing its structural issues.

Misplaced Priorities and Empty Promises

Democratic lawmakers tout their agenda as a path to progress, but their policies reveal a disconnect from the real needs of New Mexicans. From punitive alcohol taxes to misguided behavioral health programs and a glaring failure to address CYFD, Democrats are doubling down on big-government solutions that hurt the most vulnerable and leave systemic problems unaddressed. It’s time for leadership that prioritizes practical, effective solutions over ideological posturing and political expediency.

Dems’ 2025 legislative preview: Alcohol tax hike, woke policies, CYFD neglect Read More »

The trillion-dollar secret that makes Greenland irresistible for U.S. acquisition

4 Comments / Opinion / By

​​In the ever-accelerating game of geopolitics, the United States’ new leadership is championing us toward major decisions that will redraw the maps in search of a new American Golden Age. The next region of the earth to be liberated by American exceptionalism? Greenland. While some people have written off President Donald Trump’s determination to purchase Greenland as little more than a well-timed meme, there’s a very serious rationale behind it. Here’s a breakdown of why we really should, in fact, add Greenland to the list of American territories:

First, a bit of background. Greenland is an enormous island, about seven times the size of New Mexico, located northeast of Canada, between the Arctic Ocean and Iceland. It is the northernmost point of land on earth, coming closer to the north pole than any other territory. Although huge in size, the only inhabitable portions are along the south and western coasts; the entire interior is permanently glaciated. Because of this, it has very few residents, with a population just half that of Rio Rancho. The island was discovered in 999 by Viking explorers and has remained under Denmark’s control until the modern day. They currently produce nothing useful and are completely dependent on Danish subsidies.  

Perhaps that doesn’t sound like a glowing investment opportunity: a frozen wasteland whose citizens cannot support themselves. But Greenland hides a trillion-dollar secret. Beneath the ice, there is an incomprehensible wealth of natural resources. The island has recently been shown to have some of the highest-grade gold ore in the world, huge deposits of rare earth elements (REEs) critical for all kinds of modern hardware, and critical deposits of uranium, zinc, copper, aluminum, nickel, titanium, graphite, and thorium. Additionally, Greenland boasts large quantities of expected hydrocarbons, with an incredible 31 billion barrels of oil already speculated to exist. To put that into perspective, the entire United States has about 35 billion barrels in proven reserves. Greenland would quite nearly double our known oil resources, guaranteeing us energy independence for generations.

The United States uniquely possesses the technology and ingenuity necessary to exploit this impressive portfolio of natural resources under the Arctic’s challenging conditions and to extract them in a way that is ecologically sound. With American leadership, Greenland will know a prosperity and a future such that it could never have previously hoped for. Of course, the United States is not an imperial power, nor do we want to be. Our country’s very existence is antithetical to imperialism. Neither Trump nor anyone in their right mind suggests that we conquer Greenland by force. That would be a fantasy. However, we must ensure that Greenland is developed responsibly for its role in the future. Greenland has historically had a strong desire for self-determination. If this can be meaningfully implemented, it may provide a more palatable solution; until then, we must work with the political realities that are available to us.

Beyond natural resources, which alone would be an undignified motivation for taking Greenland into the fold, there is a more pressing reason. Greenland sits at a strategic bottleneck and is the key to future American and European prosperity. The time has come for its potential to be realized. Why now? The truth is that the Arctic situation is radically changing. The Northwest Passage, for hundreds of years little more than an arcane sailor’s legend, is now proving a critical reality. Many underestimate the speedy pace of Arctic development. Warming temperatures are transforming the region into a key new area for international trade, natural resource exploration, and military strategy. Arctic shipping lanes, which will be usable in the very near future, are emerging as commercially viable shipping routes, drastically slashing transit times between major North American and Eurasian markets. Protecting Greenland will place us at the forefront of this new frontier and ensure that we can shape the Arctic’s future to reflect American values and serve American interests. Without Greenland, we will be deprived of the key to this door of opportunity, and be left playing catch-up in a race that will define the geopolitical landscape of the next century.

Our adversaries are aware of the Arctic reality and have already begun to move against us in the region. In recent years the Russians have been actively developing their portion of the Arctic, investing in a large fleet of icebreakers and building up their so-called “Northern Sea Route” as a key maritime corridor. Likewise, the Chinese have integrated Russia’s Northern Sea Route into their Belt and Road initiative, a decades-long communist plot to control all Asian trade. To this end they call it the “Ice Silk Road” and have recently begun issuing sea ice forecasts for the Russian coast, facilitating easy navigation for shipping in the area. This new axis of Russian and Chinese cooperation in the far north is reshaping the Arctic landscape in real time, bending a once-neutral region against us.

It is clear that the stakes are too high for inaction. Failure to secure Greenland would be a massive failure for all of the North Atlantic’s security. Despite our nearly 75-year-long subsidization of Denmark’s security, the ineffective Danish administration of the island has done nothing but embolden our rivals, Russia and China, and left us kneecapped in a competition that we cannot afford to lose. The United States already de-facto assures Greenland’s safety with the presence of Thule Space Base in the northwest of the country. If the Danes cannot more meaningfully contribute to the shared vision of the NATO alliance, they cannot continue to have sole possession of such a strategic landmass that they have failed to develop for over a thousand years. The truth is that Denmark will have a much greater share in regional prosperity and safety if Greenland’s protection is handled by the United States.

In short, the acquisition of Greenland isn’t an option. It’s imperative for the sure future of the free world and President Trump’s advisors are wise to pursue it. It’s imperative to safeguard our national security, fortify our economy, and assert our continued leadership in one of the most unexpectedly consequential regions of the 21st century. In recent decades, and most especially under the devastating destabilization of the Biden regime, we must admit that we have lost our sense of direction in the world. Now comes the time to show the world again that, as Americans, we never shy away from boldness when the moment calls for it. Let this be one of those moments, and let’s support President Trump in his quest to lead us to a new American Golden Age. For our future, and the future of the global community, we must act now.

The trillion-dollar secret that makes Greenland irresistible for U.S. acquisition Read More »

NM’s water rights under siege: Federal meddling could wipe out our farmers

13 Comments / Opinion / By

The enduring water conflict between New Mexico and Texas has entered an unexpected turning point, with recent federal interference now threatening to upend the balance of power in the decades-long struggle for water in the borderlands. For us, this isn’t just about water—it’s about protecting our farmers, our southern towns, and the very sovereignty of our state.

At the center of this dispute is the 1938 Rio Grande Compact, a historic agreement meant to allocate water fairly between Colorado, New Mexico, and Texas. But the dynamics of water management have shifted dramatically since then. Back in June, the Supreme Court shocked many by rejecting a settlement that had taken over a decade to negotiate, which sought to address the complex relationship between surface water and groundwater while meeting the needs of all three states. The Court’s 5-4 decision argued that the settlement didn’t account for federal obligations to deliver water to Mexico, abruptly derailing years of progress in favor of the interests of an unreliable foreign nation.

Now, federal mediation has taken over, leaving us in a disadvantaged position. The federal government’s decision to stake its own claim to our groundwater has complicated what was about to be a cooperative regional effort. This as an example of gross federal overreach that not only jeopardizes our water security but also undermines our rights to manage our own resources.

Texas’ main complaint is that our farmers’ pumping of groundwater near Elephant Butte Reservoir is reducing the downstream flow of the Rio Grande, depriving Texan farmers of water they believe is rightfully theirs. While it’s true that modern science shows surface water and groundwater are interconnected, applying this knowledge to an agreement written in 1938 is wildly impractical and unjust. Our understanding of hydrology is still evolving, and crafting large-scale policy changes based on incomplete science is a recipe for disaster.

The real culprit here isn’t our use of groundwater—it’s the naturally changing climate. Drought, rising temperatures, and lighter snows have transformed the hydrological reality of the Rio Grande. These challenges affect all western states, and solving them requires innovation and cooperation, not legal blame games. Texas’ insistence on framing this as solely New Mexico’s fault ignores their own stubborn overdevelopment of their portion of the river, which has caused this problem in the first place.

The stakes couldn’t be higher for us. Farmers in the Valley of Mesilla and the Valley of Hatch, two of our most fertile regions, depend on groundwater to farm traditional crops of chile and pecan. If we were forced by outside powers to sharply cut our groundwater use, the economic fallout would devastate dozens of communities, uproot thousands of families, and destroy an agricultural region central to the New Mexican identity. And the implications go beyond our borders. If Texas wins, it could set a dangerous precedent for how water is managed all across the West, potentially sparking legal battles over groundwater in states like Arizona, Colorado, and California.

This isn’t just about water—it’s about justice and the sovereignty to manage our own resources. We have already demonstrated our commitment to accommodate Texas’ wants by investing heavily in advanced irrigation technology to maximize our water use efficiency. But we need Texas and the federal government to meet us halfway. Instead of imposing one-sided, predatory solutions, we should focus on realistic, collaborative strategies to adapt to our shared forecast of dwindling water resources.

The federal government’s role in this dispute raises deeper questions about the balance between state rights and federal oversight. By rejecting the negotiated settlement, the Supreme Court has not only delayed progress but also deepened tensions between states, making future collaboration harder. We cannot allow this decision to threaten New Mexico’s sovereignty or our ability to safeguard our own interests.

Despite the challenges, there is still a path forward. New Mexico and Texas must work together—not as historical adversaries, but as prospective partners—to address the changing realities of water in the Rio Grande. With a new federal administration to take charge next month, our shared future with both Texas and the federal government depends on investing in real innovation, mutual respect, and an honest reckoning with the future challenges we are likely to face. A fair resolution to this conflict isn’t just possible—it’s essential. For us, standing our ground isn’t just about defending our water resources; it’s about safeguarding our way of life for generations to come, and that beyond all cannot be compromised.

NM’s water rights under siege: Federal meddling could wipe out our farmers Read More »

Why NM’s crime crisis won’t end under ‘progressive’ rule

5 Comments / Opinion / By

Elections have consequences. Unfortunately, so-called “progressive” Democrats continue to hold a commanding majority in our state’s House of Representatives and Senate. Representation from both sides of the aisle and diversity of thought are pillars of a functioning and balanced government, but our reality in New Mexico is of one-party rule. This stranglehold on our institutions continues to halt progress and miss the mark when it comes to truly addressing our state’s out-of-control crime rate. 

Earlier this year, my fellow Senate Republicans collaborated across the aisle with Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham during her special legislative session to make strides in addressing public safety. Included were measures to expand criminal competency protocols and increase penalties for felons in possession of firearms, distributing fentanyl, and murdering law enforcement officers. We also introduced proposals to secure our open southern border, an issue New Mexicans and Americans at large support, in order to combat the cartel’s trafficking of drugs, humans, and contraband. An additional measure we introduced would have strengthened our state’s lackluster Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) statute in order to pursue organized criminal activity more effectively and expand the capabilities of prosecutors, specifically, expanding human trafficking sentencing. This measure, along with several of the aforementioned proposals were created with and supported by District Attorneys and law enforcement leaders from around the state and from both sides of the aisle. 

Unfortunately, as we all know, each and every one of these measures never saw the light of day. Progressive Democrat lawmakers killed the Governor’s Special Session focused on public safety, ending the session almost immediately and refusing to hear ANY legislation addressing crime and safety.

I attended this summer’s special legislative session to witness firsthand how our elected officials would address the crime epidemic my family experiences in Albuquerque every day. I was disappointed, to say the least. Make no mistake, as the only Republican Senator from Albuquerque, I will uphold my responsibility to work toward making our community a safer place for families to live and thrive. 

These proposed measures are commonsense and practical. They hold criminals accountable, deter criminal activity, and strengthen our law enforcement. The progressive wing of the Democrat party, which has immense influence and power in our state’s legislature, disagrees. They would rather stall these proposals and instead push an entirely different ideological agenda. It was recently announced that Senate Democrats plan to introduce a “crime package” that narrowly focuses on expanding behavioral health programs. This somehow will reduce the level of violence we see every day from juveniles, repeat offenders, and gangs in our state. 

While we as Republicans remain optimistic and plan to re-introduce several of these comprehensive solutions, progressive Democrat lawmakers will most likely reject each of these proposals and further miss the mark on addressing our crime crisis. As a result, New Mexico families would continue to suffer from our crime crisis in communities throughout our state. 

Elections have consequences. Our communities will not become safer under the continued leadership of radical progressives. We will fight in Santa Fe, but the real fight is on the ground with grassroots organizing in key communities to continue to expand the realignment of the Republican Party in New Mexico.

Nicole Toiassen is the senator-elect for New Mexico’s 21st state Senate District.

Why NM’s crime crisis won’t end under ‘progressive’ rule Read More »

When public officials go rogue: NM Dem’s shady move against rally

28 Comments / Opinion / By

In a blatant misuse of power, New Mexico State Land Commissioner Stephanie Garcia Richard made the decision to refuse the Trump campaign’s use of a parking lot for their rally that was held on Halloween in Albuquerque. By denying access to an area that falls within the bounds of the campaign’s legally established lease from Isleta, Garcia Richard appears to be deliberately attempting to disrupt the political process. This brazen maneuver not only disregards the principles of free speech and assembly but also sets a disturbing precedent for how public office can be wielded against those with opposing political views.

The purpose of a rally is to provide a platform for supporters and those interested in learning more about a candidate’s positions. It’s an opportunity for individuals to come together in support of their beliefs and values. For the commissioner to deny the Trump campaign access to the parking lot—a seemingly trivial part of the rally setup—signals a broader attempt to suppress political expression. Such actions are a stark violation of the American principles that allow citizens to freely express their political affiliations, regardless of partisan lines. The campaign’s lease, which extends to the parking lot, reflects a mutual understanding and right to the space. By holding the lot “hostage,” as some have described, Garcia Richard is leveraging her power in a way that appears both petty and antithetical to her duty as a public servant.

Public offices, especially one as influential as the State Land Office, are not meant to be vehicles for personal biases. They are established to serve all citizens fairly and impartially. Yet, Garcia Richard’s refusal to honor the lease agreement demonstrates a troubling trend: the erosion of neutrality in government roles, where officials prioritize partisan agendas over their constitutional oath. Instead of fostering an environment where all New Mexicans can express their political views, the State Land Office is alienating a segment of the population and attempting to dictate which voices get a platform.

This situation also highlights a broader issue in contemporary politics—using government influence to silence opposition. No public official should feel emboldened to stifle free speech and expression, yet Garcia Richard’s actions here suggest a willingness to do exactly that. This is not merely a local issue; it reflects a growing problem within American governance. When officials refuse to uphold the rights of individuals based on political disagreements, they abandon the foundational principle of representing all citizens fairly.

What New Mexico’s Republican voters—and, frankly, all Americans—deserve is a government that will respect and protect the rights of all political participants. The State Land Office’s role is to manage public lands responsibly, not to suppress lawful political expression. Commissioner Garcia Richard must be held accountable for her actions in the name of fair governance, and it is crucial for all New Mexicans, regardless of party, to call out this blatant abuse of power.

Michael Perry is a county commissioner in Chaves County, representing District 5

When public officials go rogue: NM Dem’s shady move against rally Read More »

Gov. Lujan Grisham cares more about abortion than abused children

20 Comments / Opinion / By

The safety and well-being of our children are more important to me than being “politically correct” or whatever negative feedback my words here will bring about.

Unfortunately, the opposite is the case for Governor Lujan Grisham. Her administration is more interested in placating their political party than advocating for and protecting the neglected and abused children in our state. Regardless of your personal views on this sensitive subject, no one can deny that New Mexico is the worst state to be in for disadvantaged children. We have the worst child well-being rating in the nation in large part due to the administrative failures of the Children, Youth, and Families Department (CYFD). 

Earlier this month, the Governor celebrated the new construction of a $10 million abortion clinic in Las Cruces primarily targeted at Texas mothers. That same week, the Albuquerque Journal reported the shocking cost of  CYFD’s wrongful death lawsuit settlement payouts. Your tax dollars have paid out $21 million to families of children harmed or killed under the department’s watch in the last three years. This has been an exponential increase over recent years, and yet, no solutions have been supported to allow for true departmental reform.

Consider the sum of those amounts—that is, $31 million of your tax dollars being spent to advance the political agenda of our Governor while also obscuring her failures while in office. The people of our state, and particularly our at-risk kids, cannot afford to spend another dime protecting the legacy of this administration for her to get a promotion at the end of her term. Let me be clear: this is a leadership failure. The hardworking employees at CYFD have tough and oftentimes thankless jobs; it is not their fault the department they work for has a 34% vacancy rate, it’s not their fault children in the system are still sleeping in office buildings, and it’s also not their fault that employees are overworked and underpaid. These sad realities are the result of mismanagement and a lack of care from the Governor and her executive staff. 

Regardless of your political affiliation or personal beliefs, each and every New Mexican, especially New Mexican parents, should be ashamed of our leadership, our failed track record, and our continual downward path as a state when it comes to protecting our vulnerable and neglected children. 

New Mexican’s “reproductive health” rights are some of the most protected, unrestricted, and available in the nation. Should our focus really be in this direction? The environment we provide for our children is the worst in the nation. Yet, in the decade I have been in the Roundhouse, all we have seen are empty promises of reform. Our case workers are doing all they can, but without support from the administration, they will continue to run up against a brick wall and burn out quickly.

We must get serious about reform. New Mexico is again ranked the worst in the country according to the thorough “Kids Count” research project provided by the Annie E. Casey Foundation. We are failing our children and at the same time prioritizing all the wrong things; with neglected and vulnerable children being the ones who pay the price. 

Enough is enough, we must hold our elected officials accountable. The statistics and balance sheets don’t lie, the Governor and Democratic majorities in the State Legislature have (much like our public school students) failed. Keep this in mind this November. I hope, for the sake of our children, our state heads in a different direction.

State Sen. David Gallegos represents New Mexico Senate District 51 in the Legislature, previously serving in the New Mexico House of Representatives. He is also a school board member for Eunice Public Schools.

Gov. Lujan Grisham cares more about abortion than abused children Read More »

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 23

Stay Updated

Scroll to Top