Politics

‘Democracy’ in crisis? Public shut out of lawmaking in Santa Fe

10 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

The legislative process in Santa Fe has long faced scrutiny, but according to the Rio Grande Foundation, the situation is only worsening. The organization, which has been involved in the Legislature for many years, argues that the current system actively hinders public involvement while leaving lawmakers uninformed about the real impact of the bills they consider.

“Whether this is by design or not, it is important to understand that the public is not really welcomed to the process,” the Rio Grande Foundation asserts. The group details several troubling trends that, in their view, demonstrate an increasingly closed-door approach to lawmaking in New Mexico.

One of the most glaring issues cited is the way Democrat committee chairs handle public testimony. The foundation notes that chairs appear to be under immense pressure from leadership to move bills along at breakneck speed, leading to testimony being dramatically curtailed. “Repeatedly and in nearly ALL committees on very controversial bills, Democrat committee chairs often limit comment to a handful of individuals or a very limited time period,” the report states.

This suppression of public input is taking various forms. In some cases, chairs have restricted testimony to “the first 10 people” in line, regardless of how many others may be waiting to speak. The foundation specifically pointed to an incident involving HB 11, a paid leave bill, where the chair allowed only 10 individuals to testify despite 42 people raising their hands in opposition. This policy, they warn, can lead to dangerous situations, especially for older or disabled individuals who travel to Santa Fe to make their voices heard but find themselves outpaced by younger, more mobile participants.

Further exacerbating the problem is the restriction of time allotted to speakers. In some instances, testimony is capped at a mere one minute—barely enough time to make a meaningful statement on complex legislation. Meanwhile, those participating via Zoom—a tool that has expanded public access to legislative proceedings—are often ignored entirely. The foundation states that “Zoom testimony is also extremely limited on the most important bills,” with participants often waiting on the call and raising their virtual hands to speak, only to be disregarded.

Adding to the frustration, the scheduling of hearings is erratic and opaque. Instead of being held at predictable times that respect the public’s ability to participate, hearings are frequently postponed at the last minute or shuffled around the legislative calendar. “Bills are continuously ‘rolled’ to the next meeting and meeting times are changed at the last second,” the foundation claims, making it nearly impossible for engaged citizens to plan their attendance.

The organization argues that these issues reflect a broader trend of the majority party—Democrats, who have controlled Santa Fe for decades—disregarding the principles of democratic participation. “The rules are set by the majority party. If the Democrats who have run Santa Fe for decades actually care about ‘democracy,’ they need to act to solve some of these process issues to really serve the people of New Mexico.”

‘Democracy’ in crisis? Public shut out of lawmaking in Santa Fe Read More »

‘Justice and equity’: MLG taps 78-year-old progressive for vacant House seat

9 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Wednesday, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham appointed Martha Garcia, a 78-year-old former Cibola County Commissioner and president of the Ramah Navajo Chapter House, to fill the vacant New Mexico House District 6 seat following the passing of Rep. Eliseo Alcon.

The district, which covers Cibola and McKinley counties, including the Village of Milan, the Pueblo of Zuni, and parts of the Navajo Nation, has been unrepresented since late November when Alcon resigned due to declining health. Alcon, who was 74, passed away in January.

Progressive freshman State Sen. Angel Charley (D-Acoma), whose district overlaps with HD 6, called Garcia’s appointment “historic” and praised her commitment to advancing justice and equity. “Today’s appointment marks a significant milestone, not only for House District 6 but for the generations who have fought for a voice in decisions that shape our future,” Charley said in a statement. “Martha’s commitment to justice, equity, and the well-being of our people will serve as a guiding light in the legislature. I look forward to working alongside her to uplift our small towns and tribal communities in western New Mexico and protect the values we hold dear.”

Photo of Ms. Garcia via the Cibola County Commission website archive.

Garcia, known for her progressive stance on key issues, did not respond to voicemails requesting comment on Wednesday, according to reports.

Before Garcia’s selection, governing boards in Cibola and McKinley counties had nominated two other candidates for the seat, but residency investigations found one of them ineligible. The governor chose Garcia over former Rep. Harry Garcia and former state Sen. Clemente Sanchez after a charade attempting to deem Rep. Garcia ineligible. He is a more moderate Democrat versus the progressive Ms. Garcia.

Garcia’s swearing-in ceremony is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, officially marking the beginning of her tenure in the New Mexico House of Representatives.

‘Justice and equity’: MLG taps 78-year-old progressive for vacant House seat Read More »

NM’s $10.8B budget fiasco: Climate change, beavers, cash for illegals + more

18 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

The New Mexico House of Representatives has approved a state budget proposal valued at $10.8 billion—an amount that, if enacted, would mark the largest in state history with nearly a 6% increase over last year’s record spending. While proponents argue that the budget is designed to invest in key priorities, critics say it represents a bloated and fiscally irresponsible expansion.

According to House Appropriations and Finance Committee Chair Rep. Nathan Small (D-Las Cruces), the proposal builds on the Legislative Finance Committee’s recommendations by adding significant, recurring investments in areas such as education, public safety, economic development, and water protection.

“I think we can all agree that those are key priorities for all New Mexicans,” Small stated during a news conference ahead of the hearing. He maintained that these investments would have an “immediate impact for New Mexicans and set us up for sustainable growth in the long run.”

Under the plan, the Public Education Department would see a 6% funding bump, while Higher Education would gain nearly 3%, and Early Childhood Education and Care would receive an over 21% increase. The state remains the worst in the country in terms of higher education despite massive funding bumps to education budgets.

Other departments—such as the new Health Care Authority and the Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department—are slated for double-digit growth. Furthermore, public safety, corrections, and legal services are among the areas set to receive recurring increases, and state employees could expect an average raise of 4%.

Yet behind the fanfare of “transparent and collaborative” budget-making—Small even hailed it as “the most open, transparent and collaborative budget ever” and emphasized that “if you’re a rancher in Raton, this budget’s for you. If you’re a 6th grade student at Seboyeta Elementary, this budget’s for you. If you’re worried about affordability and access to health care in Albuquerque and any other part of the state, this budget’s for you”—there is a growing outcry over the sheer magnitude and scope of the spending.

A GOP substitute, introduced by Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R-Carlsbad), sought to pare back the proposal by cutting $1.5 billion in what she called “low-priority” one-time spending. Her version aimed to bolster state reserves further and redirect record oil and gas revenues directly to residents in the form of $600 payments. However, Democrats quickly criticized her plan for slashing investments in climate change and free housing for vagrants, among others.

Despite the contentious debate, the House approved the budget by a vote of 50 to 18, with the proposal now moving to the Senate and eventually to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham for potential line-item vetoes.

Adding to the chorus of fiscal alarm, Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo) and Piñon Post editor took to Twitter to lambaste the budget, including its over $31.2 million allocated for climate change, $3.5 million for American beavers, over $600,000 for illegal alien programs on state college campuses, $35 million for paid family and medical leave funding, and more. His tweet read:

Critics argue that the lavish spending priorities, including what they describe as extraneous allocations for “culturally competent healthcare” and unconventional items like conserving the American beaver, reveal a troubling disregard for fiscal restraint. While advocates insist that these investments are critical to New Mexico’s future, opponents see the budget as an unnecessary and unsustainable expansion of state expenditures—one that places excessive burdens on taxpayers in the name of “progress.”

NM’s $10.8B budget fiasco: Climate change, beavers, cash for illegals + more Read More »

Trump’s bold warning: NM faces financial Armageddon if MLG dares to defy

56 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

At a high-profile White House gathering of state leaders, President Donald Trump made his policy positions unmistakably clear. Among those in attendance was far-left Democrat New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham—a governor whose state relies heavily on federal funding and now faces a stark choice. New Mexico, one of the nation’s most federally dependent states, could see billions in federal aid vanish if it dares to defy Trump’s directives.

During the meeting of the National Governors Association, Trump reiterated his readiness to cut off federal dollars from any state that does not toe the line. This firm stance echoes the earlier showdown with Maine’s Gov. Janet Mills, who vowed to take legal action if federal funding were withheld. “Any time a public interaction like that takes place, it’s coming from a person who’s grounded in their values,” noted Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer—a sentiment that underscores the high stakes for states whose budgets are intricately tied to federal support.

Governor Lujan Grisham’s presence was a clear reminder that New Mexico’s financial well-being is on the line. Federal funds account for a substantial portion of the state’s annual budget, and analysts warn that any move to buck Trump’s policies could trigger cuts amounting to billions of dollars. For a state that depends on this support for critical services and infrastructure, such a loss would be devastating.

Throughout the discussions, some state leaders attempted to find common ground. Yet, the underlying message was unambiguous: challenging the Trump administration’s policies is not without serious consequences. “I got to put the people’s interests before my own interests, before my partisan interest. I got a job to do,” one governor declared, highlighting the heavy burden of leadership when federal dollars are at stake.

Supporters of President Trump argue that his decisive actions are necessary to maintain accountability and fiscal discipline across the country. In their view, Trump’s tough stance is not an overreach but a vital measure to ensure that states remain aligned with national priorities. 

For New Mexico, this means that Lujan Grisham must carefully weigh her policy choices. A refusal to cooperate could result in severe financial repercussions that would undermine state programs and services relied on by millions of New Mexicans.

In a political landscape where partisan idealism sometimes overshadows practical governance, the decision facing Lujan Grisham is clear. Aligning with Trump’s policies could secure New Mexico’s continued flow of federal support, while defiance may not only isolate the state from critical funding but also set a dangerous precedent for other Democrat-led states. With New Mexico’s fiscal future at a crossroads, the stakes could not be higher.

Trump’s bold warning: NM faces financial Armageddon if MLG dares to defy Read More »

Week 5: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, 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 was one of the busiest weeks I’ve ever seen at the Roundhouse so far, and here’s what happened:

Committees

In the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee (HGEIC) this week, we heard many bills and resolutions, such as H.J.R. 11 (to remove the anti-donation clause), which I voted against because it had absolutely no guardrails and would directly fund with our tax dollars “nonprofits” that could funnel cash into all sorts of nefarious places.

We also heard in HGEIC a bill, H.B. 228, that would mandate that municipalities do not change the rules on businesses mid-way through the project when constructing electric fences for security reasons, which I voted for. We also passed H.B. 208, of which I am a cosponsor, to allow voter registrations for hunting and fishing licenses.

In HGEIC on Friday, I voted against a bill that would push a so-called “circular economy” in the state, which had unknown benchmarks and mandates for such policies that would run through the New Mexico Environment Department. Also, that day, we passed a very good bill, which I am cosponsoring, H.B. 293, to eliminate state taxes on seniors’ social security payments.

On Tuesday in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC), I advocated and voted against H.B. 9, which would ban the county from helping detain criminal aliens in our Otero County Processing Center, which would kill over 250 jobs and make our county lose millions. That day, we also passed a good bill, which I am cosponsoring, H.B. 287, adding text message and social media message threats to existing statutes that only allow using a telephone to make threats as prosecutable.

On Thursday, in that same committee, surprisingly, we were able to kill a horrible bill, H.B. 247, on a tied 3-3 vote that would have bureaucratized health care and confused patients with insane disclosure laws for doctors who are not osteopathic doctors or medical doctors. I also voted against H.B. 339, which would have expanded the state’s “Human Rights Act” to include “discriminating” against renters who use Section 8 vouchers and other government handouts.

On Saturday in HCPAC, we had a slew of terrible bills that I voted against, including H.B. 442, which would create “rent stabilization,” also known as rent control, to socialize the housing market, as has happened in New York City and San Francisco. Another bad bill I voted against was H.B. 418, which is shoddily written and attacks landlords by forcing 24-month time frames on mobile home renters’ leases while also punishing landlords with hefty fines if they could be found in non-compliance with the narrow and restrictive language of the bill.

Floor Sessions

On the floor Monday, I debated for nearly three hours a terrible bill, H.B. 6, which forces “prevailing wages” on all industrial revenue bond-assisted projects — crushing economic development across our state, resulting in fewer jobs and fewer projects. I offered two amendments to the bill to 1) exempt small businesses and 2) exempt projects that can prove other states with the same incentives but no “prevailing wage” mandates would be better climates for such projects. Both of these amendments were tabled on party-line votes.

During Tuesday’s floor session, I heavily debated horrible bills, including one (H.B. 26) that would allow just about anyone to be arrested for “ticket scalping” — even if just selling one ticket for just $1 more than one paid for it — which would end up with countless people thrown in jail under the bill’s changes to state statute.

On Wednesday, during the floor session, I voted against legislation that would penalize businesses, including H.B. 49, forcing all establishments everywhere to mandate televisions have closed captions on at all times.

On Thursday, I heavily debated a horrible bill, S.B. 3, to give an unknown amount of money to “behavioral health” programs, which is part of a terrible package of other bills to spend around $1 billion on such programs, which could include transgender surgeries, “gun violence prevention,” “climate change,” and “free” (government-funded) houses for drug addicts.

Friday’s floor session included the companion bill to the horrible S.B. 3, S.B. 1, which myself, Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park), and a couple of others debated. Rep. Lord has been a steadfast patriot and a champion for the people who actually does the work of reading bills and debating them heavily to ensure the public knows what is in them, as I do.

We also heard H.B. 56, relating to Medicaid reimbursements for “birthing centers,” which didn’t mention the word “woman” once, instead foregoing it for the term “pregnant people.” I voted against it.

During the floor session on Saturday, we had a concurrence vote on H.B. 8, the Democrats’ weak “crime package” that will not fight crime.

We also passed a bill I am so honored to cosponsor, H.B. 36, to improve access to care by allowing optometrists to perform minor outpatient procedures in their offices, which was a huge step toward de-bureaucratizing health care in the state.

In Summary

This was the last week to file legislation, so all my legislation for the session is filed and can be accessed here.

The week ahead will be very eventful in my committees, with lots of bad bills scheduled for the upcoming week.

To see all committee schedules for all committees, click here.

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

God bless you,
John

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

Week 5: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block Read More »

In El Paso sector, illegal border crossings plummet to historic lows

14 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In Sunland Park, New Mexico, a quiet stretch of the U.S.-Mexico border saw just one migrant crossing illegally in a span of four hours. The lone individual, a 23-year-old Mexican national named Jovani, was met by six federal agents who informed him he would be sent back to Mexico the same day, according to a report by the New York Post. This shows the border policies under President Donald Trump are working — and at a rapid pace.

The El Paso sector, which spans western Texas and New Mexico, has experienced a significant drop in illegal crossings, with fewer than 100 migrants being caught each day. This marks a sharp decline from the peak of 1,800 per day in 2023 and even a substantial reduction from the 277 apprehended daily in December. Across the entire southern border, the average number of daily apprehensions at the beginning of the month stood at 359, positioning the U.S. for what could be the lowest monthly illegal border crossings in over 25 years, according to leaked Customs and Border Protection data.

Border Patrol agent Orlando Marrero-Rubio emphasized the efficiency of current border enforcement, stating, “It doesn’t matter if it took you 30 days, 40 days, 60 days to make that illegal crossing, we’ll expedite removal and have you in your country of origin within hours.” Jovani, who had attempted to evade authorities by running through the rugged desert terrain after scaling the border wall, revealed that it was his second attempt to cross into the U.S. He had paid $7,000 to cartel-affiliated smugglers, commonly referred to as “coyotes,” to facilitate his journey.

Jovani, visibly disheartened, showed the wounds on his hands from descending the border wall. “I’m very sad because I couldn’t cross because I couldn’t get to where I wanted to go,” he admitted. “I’m worried about deportations because this is my second time crossing.”

According to Marrero-Rubio, Jovani’s grievances are common among many migrants. However, unlike under the previous administration’s “catch and release” policy, where migrants would often turn themselves in knowing they would likely be released with an immigration court date, the current enforcement approach has led to increased attempts to cross undetected. 

Under the Biden administration, Border Patrol agents were frequently occupied processing migrants rather than patrolling the border. Now, with the return of Trump-era policies, agents are back in full force, directly securing the border.

Border Patrol sources have described their past duties as resembling “babysitting,” as they often had to process individuals with criminal backgrounds, gang affiliations, or even terrorist connections, many of whom were subsequently released into the U.S. Now, with heightened enforcement, additional troops deployed, and the “catch and release” policy rescinded, agents feel a renewed sense of purpose. “It’s a relief for our agents, they don’t feel overwhelmed,” said Marrero-Rubio.

Two years ago, agents in the El Paso sector were detaining around 2,500 migrants daily. In recent weeks, that number has fallen to fewer than 100 per day. With more personnel and time available, Border Patrol and the military have worked to regain control of areas once dominated by cartel smugglers, such as Mount Cristo Rey in Sunland Park. The mountain, crowned with a towering statue of Jesus on the Cross, was previously a haven for smugglers who would evade capture by hiding in the rocky terrain and even assaulting agents with stones. The situation was similar just miles away, where hundreds of migrants had overwhelmed the border and clashed with authorities.

Today, that once-chaotic area is largely silent, reinforced with additional razor wire and patrols, including state law enforcement sent by Texas Governor Greg Abbott. Border Patrol agent Claudio Herrera noted the shift in operations, stating, “Right now, with everything working out towards our favor, now we have more agents on the line doing what they’re assigned to do and looking out for making those apprehensions instead of processing.”

In El Paso sector, illegal border crossings plummet to historic lows 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 »

Woke Biden-appointed U.S. attorney out of a job 

12 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

U.S. Attorney Alexander M.M. Uballez has announced his resignation following a request from President Donald J. Trump, marking a significant shift in New Mexico’s federal legal leadership. Appointed by Joe Biden in January 2022 and confirmed by the Senate in May of the same year, Uballez’s tenure has been characterized by a “progressive” approach to criminal justice, emphasizing rehabilitation and diversity initiatives.

During his time in office, Uballez implemented several policies aimed at reforming traditional prosecutorial practices. He prioritized intervention and support for individuals transitioning from incarceration back into society, reflecting his belief in “seeking redemption not isolation.”

This approach often involved alternatives to incarceration. While his initiatives aimed to reduce recidivism and promote community integration, many argue that such policies inadvertently lead to the release of offenders who reoffended, raising concerns about public safety.

In addition to his focus on rehabilitation, Uballez was a strong advocate for woke Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies within the legal system. He prioritized identity politics over merit-based practices, impacting the objectivity and effectiveness of the justice system.

Uballez’s tenure also saw the initiation of an inquiry into a significant public corruption scheme involving the dismissal of hundreds of DWI cases in New Mexico. Despite these efforts, his progressive policies have been a point of contention, with many noting that a focus on rehabilitation and DEI compromises the primary objectives of law enforcement and public safety.

Following his resignation, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Holland S. Kastrin will serve as Acting U.S. Attorney until a successor is nominated and confirmed.

Woke Biden-appointed U.S. attorney out of a job  Read More »

Semi-auto ban, red flag expansion, and more: See the status of these gun grabs

21 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

As the 2025 New Mexico Legislative Session reaches its halfway point, several pieces of anti-gun legislation are making their way through the state legislature, with some bills gaining traction while others remain stalled.

The most significant recent development was the passage of the “weapon conversion device” ban as part of the omnibus crime bill, HB8. This bill, which was altered and pushed through the House Judiciary Committee, was quickly advanced to the House floor, where it passed on a 48-20 vote. Notably, several Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the measure.

According to the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association (NMSSA), HB8 now contains the following provision:

“Unlawful possession of a weapon conversion device consists of a person knowingly having in that person’s possession an unlawfully obtained weapon conversion device or knowingly transporting an unlawfully obtained weapon conversion device… ‘weapon conversion device’ means a part or combination of parts designed and intended to convert a semiautomatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon.”

With the House’s approval, HB8 now heads to the Senate, although committee assignments for the bill have not yet been announced.

Meanwhile, HB12, which seeks to expand New Mexico’s red-flag gun confiscation law, was notably left out of HB8. According to NMSSA, efforts were made by the bill’s sponsors to include it in the omnibus legislation, but they were unsuccessful. HB12 has now been awaiting action on the House floor for over a week. NMSSA warns that it could be brought up for a vote at any time and is urging continued opposition to the measure.

Several anti-gun bills introduced in the Senate remain in committee and have yet to see movement. These include:

  • SB255, which would expand the criminalization of private firearms transfers, is currently sitting in the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee.
  • SB279, a proposed ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines, as well as SB244, which would make it a crime for a minor to possess a firearm, both waiting for hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  • SB318, which could allow anti-gun activists to sue gun stores in New Mexico out of existence,was assigned to the Senate Tax, Business & Transportation Committee.

As for pro-gun legislation, HB202, which would establish a tax credit for the purchase of gun safes, is scheduled for a hearing in the House Taxation and Revenue Committee on Monday, February 17. The bill aims to encourage safe firearm storage by offering financial incentives to gun owners who invest in secure storage solutions.

With the pace of the legislative session picking up, NMSSA warns that more bills could advance quickly through committees in the coming days. The organization continues to urge Second Amendment supporters to stay vigilant, share information, and engage in the legislative process to oppose the proposed restrictions.

As the debate over gun legislation intensifies in Santa Fe, the fate of these bills will likely come down to key votes in the coming weeks, making citizen engagement and legislative scrutiny more critical than ever.

Semi-auto ban, red flag expansion, and more: See the status of these gun grabs Read More »

Week 4: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, 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.

What a week it has been at the Roundhouse! Here’s what happened in my committees, as well as other events of note.

On Monday, in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee (HGEIC), I moved to table a bad piece of legislation (H.C.R. 1), which would limit the number of bills each member could present to just five — silencing the voices of New Mexicans who want their voices heard in the legislative process. The committee tabled the bad legislation.

On Tuesday, in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC), we had multiple bad bills (and some good bills) being heard, but Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) and I were repeatedly silenced by the chairwoman, Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D-Las Cruces), who tried to cut off Rep. Lord’s debate, continuously interrupted our lines of questioning and pushed all Republican bills to the bottom of the agenda. She then stymied debate on Rep. Jimmy Mason’s (R-Artesia) bill (H.B. 162), of which I am a cosponsor, and rolled all the other GOP bills we were supposed to have heard. After the meeting, I told the chairwoman that I would go to the speaker with these concerns, and she told me, “Yeah, good luck with that.”

On Wednesday, Rep. Lord and I addressed the full House of Representatives and told the speaker of this grievous abuse, asking him to talk with the HCPAC chairwoman.

In HGEIC on Wednesday, we heard H.B. 85, which is a really bad bill banning all so-called “non-functional” turf (like grass) from public medians and government buildings, forcing them to be replaced with “zeroscape.” This would apply to ALL state-funded projects, including in our cities and counties. These changes would cost our localities millions of dollars and would ban grass medians (such as on Juniper Drive in Alamogordo, where people use the medians to walk their dogs), and create inconveniences for all people — not to mention the budgetary process. It would also extend to projects, such as domestic violence shelters, that get state funding, making it even more detrimental to the state and to our district. Unfortunately, the terrible bill was advanced through the committee along party lines.

On Thursday, HCPAC met again, with many controversial bills on the agenda, including a good bill (H.B. 185) that would protect women’s sports from biological men being able to take titles away from women. It would have also protected these female athletes, who, in many cases, have been injured competing against biological men. During the discussion, Ferrary cut us off repeatedly while we asked questions, demanding we only ask questions and not make statements. However, when a Democrat representative read a 5-6 minute-long written statement, the chairwoman allowed it — blatant political discrimination against Rep. Lord and I because we are Republicans.

On Friday, I was forced to once again give another floor speech to the speaker asking for us to be treated equally and showed him the specific passages in the rules where we were not being given our equal voice in the committee — a disservice to the great people of our districts.

That morning in HGEIC, I voted against H.B. 252, which aimed to try to skirt around the anti-donation clause to give large checks to guardians of children (handouts) by working with foundations that would help match the grant. Although this might be worth doing in the private sector with fully private funding, I don’t believe it is the government’s role to intervene to administer the program. Also, the pilot program, which the bill references, only serves a handful of counties (none in southeast New Mexico), so that further cemented my opposition to the legislation.

On Saturday, I jumped between HGEIC and HCPAC, which both met that day, and we heard multiple bills, including H.B. 76, which would take away doctors’ authority to use their best judgment — forcing every newborn infant to have tests that would result in cardiac tests requiring airlifting to Albuquerque. Many physicians, including pediatric cardiologists in our district, opposed the bill, so I voted against it along with Rep. Lord.

We also heard in that committee H.B. 253, which aimed to seal eviction records after three years of the eviction, giving landlords less information when renting to new tenants who may have had evictions, even in the most grievous cases of past tenants using rentals for meth labs, causing damage (such as holes in the walls, ripping copper out of the pipes), or domestic violence situations, etc. Both Rep. Lord and I voted against it.

Another bill that was heard in the committee, H.B. 250, was to give free menstrual products to inmates, but the bill did not have important definitions and was very vague, so I voted against it. The chair rolled all the rest of the bills on the agenda (which so happened to all be Republican bills).

That afternoon and evening on the House floor, we debated the Democrats’ weak and ineffective “public safety” bill (H.B. 8), which will have little to no tangible effect on crime. We put forward our own substitute bill on the floor to give real solutions (such as addressing juvenile crime and increasing penalties for felons), but the Democrats rejected these ideas on mostly partisan votes. The House ultimately voted for the bill, with only 20 of us rejecting it (myself included), and the legislation now makes its way over to the Senate.

The week ahead will be very eventful in my committees, with lots of bad bills scheduled for the upcoming week. We are also set to debate legislation on the House floor, so watch for those agendas below.

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

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

To see the latest House committee calendar, which includes Zoom links to testify, click here.

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 and fight with every fiber of my being to protect our Constitutional rights. You can always count on me to stand with our shared conservative American values.

God bless you,
John

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

Week 4: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block Read More »

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 … 216
Scroll to Top