On this week’s interview Paul talks to attorney and author Philip K. Howard. Howard is Chair of Common Good and a bestselling author, and has advised both parties on needed reforms. In his new book, Everyday Freedom (Rodin Books, 2024), he pinpoints the source of powerlessness that is fraying American culture and causing public failure and offers a bold vision of simpler governing frameworks to re-empower Americans in their daily choices. Paul and Howard discuss the US Constitution as a framework for our society and public sector labor unions as villains in driving division and failure in American society.

Apparently members of Santa Fe County Commission want people in the county to use more plastic. At least that’s how we’d have to interpret their plan to consider banning plastic bags in the unincorporated areas of the County.

While these bans have always been known to have a dubious environmental impact, the best known study of the environmental impact of plastic bag bans was recently done in New Jersey (a state with such a ban on the books). According to the study of the ban which was adopted in 2022, “Plastic consumption in New Jersey spiked by nearly three times from the use of heavier, reusable bags, increasing greenhouse gas emissions from the use of bags by 500 percent.”

Furthermore, “The reusable bags were used only 2 or 3 times before being misplaced or disposed of—not the 16 times needed to positively impact the environment.”

Government policies always have their unintended consequences. Plastic bag bans are no different. Not only should Santa Fe’s County Commission reject such a ban, but if they care about the environment, the City of Santa Fe, Los Alamos, Silver City, and Las Cruces city governments should end their bans.

The Gov. has signed HB195. The basic idea is to subsidize “affordable” housing (below market price) near employment centers. 

On the front page of this morning’s Albuquerque Journal, Gov. Lujan Grisham touts her “accomplishments” for business in New Mexico. While it would be hard NOT to do something for business with the kinds of budget surpluses the State has had in New Mexico in recent years, it is hard to see how anything that happened this session will make business owners and others from across the nation sit up and take notice about New Mexico.

For starters, the BEST thing about the session was something that DIDN’T happen. The Gov. said nothing about a possible paid family leave mandate funded in part by a new tax on businesses (SB 3/HB6). Thankfully, the Legislature narrowly avoided passing this anti-business measure.

Of course crime and education which are always major issues for businesses were not seriously addressed in any way. Even the Gov. expressed frustration about the lack of action on crime (although her actions are focused more on taking away guns). On education the Gov. remains focused on forcing unwilling rural districts to adopt 5-day school weeks. 

They DID slightly reduce personal income taxes but raised capital gains and corporate taxes. The Gov. COULD veto these, but we’re not holding our breath. Ultimately, even with a $3.5 billion surplus GRT reform was not even discussed (this analysis is based on a bill that addressed GRT and corporate income taxes from last session). Until that happens OR other taxes are seriously reduced, New Mexico will not be considered “business friendly.”

Our tax dollars are now subsidizing the marijuana industry and it makes no sense (regardless of your views on marijuana).

State capital outlay bill has $16 million for UnitedStadium.

PNM adds EV subsidies to existing/new subsidies and mandates. Also, Mercedes Benz said they’ll continue producing gas powered cars after 2030.

An electric car charger has been pulled from the market over fears it could be hacked and used to attack the power grid.

A new report says 0.37% of vehicles on the road in NM are electric.

Is this article by 4 “progressive” NM legislators the most out of touch article on crime yet? 

In any given year or other abbreviated time period it may seem that New Mexico is more or less keeping up with its neighbors. In reality, it is being left behind and it isn’t really close. I found an interesting website: CountryEconomy.com which can be used to put together some of these charts.

RGF complained after the session that once again the Legislature did not enact needed policy reforms that would boost New Mexico’s economy despite having a massive surplus.

For starters, the first two charts are New Mexico vs. Texas. The first chart is total GDP. While Texas has ALWAYS had a bigger economy than New Mexico, the Texas economy has grown far more quickly than New Mexico’s. Back in 1963 (the first year included) Texas’ economy was 9.6 times New Mexico’s. By 2022 the Texas economy was 19 times the size of New Mexico’s.

On a per-person basis New Mexico the gap between Texas and New Mexico used to be quite small, but in 2022 the gap is now nearly 35%.

Colorado is in many ways more similar to New Mexico in relative population size and geography, but back in 1963 Colorado’s GDP was about 2 times as big as New Mexico’s. Today it is 4 times as big.

On a per-person basis Colorado, which as recently as the early 1980s had per capita incomes similar to those in New Mexico now has incomes that are 42 percent greater than in New Mexico.

The site is full of useful information. What other states should we compare with New Mexico and why?

While RGF’s policy expertise is not in the area of crime, everyone in New Mexico, especially Albuquerque, is affected by the City/State’s serious crime problems. Most agree that nothing much was done (again) to address the issue in the 2024 session.

But, a small group of “progressives” hastens to disagree with that assessment. They write in the ABQ Journal to assert that some pretty far-flung policies from this session will alleviate crime. We are unconvinced. They write:

Decades of research have shown us that we can’t arrest our way out of homelessness, addiction, mental illness or poverty. Mass incarceration actually has an adverse effect on public safety by breaking up families, saddling people with criminal records, and diverting resources away from addressing the root causes of crime.

The people of El Salvador would like a word. The nation with a crime problem far worse than New Mexico’s has cut its murder rate by 70% with a “tough on crime approach.” That being said, reducing crime isn’t as simple as tossing a bunch of people in jail, but we haven’t been very “smart” on crime in New Mexico.

And the “accomplishments” of the 2024 Legislature they cite including so-called “affordable housing,” spending on rural hospitals, and a pilot project to provide to provide stipends for attending workforce training programs are not remotely “anti-crime.” Claiming they will address crime doesn’t make it so.

These views are held by some of New Mexico’s most “progressive” Democratic legislators, but if MLG wanted to do something about crime as opposed to just taking guns from law-abiding citizens, it would seem she could work with moderate Democrats and Republicans to make that happen. So far we see no signs of that happening.

Fresh off the Legislature adding $50 million in annual EV subsidies to the already long list of state and federal EV subsidies and mandates, PNM (the State’s largest utility) has added its own incentives to the long list of EV subsidies. 

According to the Albuquerque Journal, the utility has received approval from New Mexico Public Regulation Commission voted for PNM’s “Transportation Electrification Program for 2024 to 2026.”

As with ANY government subsidy, the costs will be borne by rate payers. According to the article, PNM’s plan will “cost New Mexicans a few dollars more per month on their electric bills.”

Furthermore, The total cost of the Transportation Electrification Program added up to $37 million in PNM’s original application. The final total program cost will likely adjust slightly with commissioners’ modifications.

Where will the subsidy push end? And will all of these subsidies and mandates help to achieve the Gov.’s 43% EV mandate by 2026 or 82% by 2032? 

In other news Mercedes Benz just backed away from plans to phase out gas-powered cars by 2030 and instead stated they will, “make petrol cars well into the 2030’s.”

On this week’s interview Paul sits down with Rep. John Block. Block has been a consistent voice for conservative principles in the Legislature since he took office in 2023. He also manages the Pinon Post, a political news site dealing with New Mexico politics.

Block wound up coming in 2nd overall in the Foundation’s Freedom Index this year. We discuss what happened and didn’t happen in the 2024 session and how New Mexicans can work together to improve their state with the entire Legislature up for election later this year.

When the City of Albuquerque approved a plan for a new United soccer stadium at Balloon Fiesta Park, we believed that taxpayers would be “on the hook” for cost overruns and other expenses. After all, in 2021 taxpayers voted down a $50 million bond for a stadium expected to cost $65-$70 million near downtown.

Now, under the new agreement and after a doubling of construction costs (according to the LFC) the agreement moving forward is for the team to put up $30 million and the City to put up $13.5 million in state capital outlay dollars for a total of $43.5 million towards a stadium at Balloon Fiesta Park.

We knew something was fishy. Well, as it turns out we were right. Thanks to the massive revenue surplus generated by the oil and gas industry (and some shady dealings in the capital outlay bill) the State of New Mexico is putting up what appears to be AN ADDITIONAL $16 million for the United Stadium (see page 1).

Sadly, the exact nature of the $16 million is impossible to discern, but what else would the State spend $16 million on? NM’s capital outlay system is widely seen as a disaster and this is one of the ways the process is abused by politicians (likely the Gov. in this case).

So, in case you are wondering, the  current tally is $30 million from the team and approximately the same amount from State taxpayers. That doesn’t include opportunity costs associated with other uses of the prime real estate, the Industrial Revenue Bonds, and more.

There MAY still be more to come, but a $60 million stadium is at least plausible.

Thanks to an alert friend of RGF for alerting us to this expenditure.

At the Rio Grande Foundation we have never opposed marijuana legalization. Our view is in line with the libertarian perspective that people should not be tossed in jail for buying, selling, or using pot.

On the flip side, marijuana is not an industry that is going to support overall economic growth and it shouldn’t/won’t be a big source of government revenues (relative to other industries). Policymakers should not be promoting legalized pot as “economic development.” 

And with all the taxes paid to the State by the marijuana industry and the fact that marijuana isn’t being legally sold across state lines (due to federal restrictions), it is absurd for tax dollars (LEDA) to be used to subsidize the marijuana industry. But, according to news reports LEDA $$ just went to a Clovis-based marijuana “manufacturing and processing” facility. 

Support or oppose legalization, our tax dollars shouldn’t be used to subsidize it. 

Paul and Wally both attended the Seinfeld show. They have numerous thoughts:

1) The City did a poor job with logistics. 

2) The media didn’t condemn the protests for simply targeting a Jewish comedian (same with Meow Wolf):

3) While Paul and Wally believe that protestors have the right to share their beliefs, they should be doing so with their elected officials.

Freedom Index votes are finalized for the 2024 New Mexico legislative session.

As Paul noted in a recent blog post moderate Democrats came to the rescue of sanity in the 2024 session.

Just in time for the election President Biden appears to be backing away from his EV overreach. MLG shows no signs of backing off. Meanwhile the ABQ Journal finally covered the adoption of costly new mandates requiring EV chargers.

The State is giving a cannabis business funds through the State’s LEDA corporate welfare program.

Yesterday was President’s Day. Here’s our take on some of the best and worst.

Here are some candidates for the best presidents in American history from a limited government perspective with influence of Ivan Eland’s excellent book Recarving Rushmore.

1. John Tyler:

2. Coolidge

3. Harding

4. Cleveland

5. Reagan

Here are some of our candidates for the very worst presidents who increased the size and scope of the US government.  Your thoughts in the comments please!

1. Wilson

2. FDR

3. Biden

4. George W. Bush

5. LBJ

Unlike other vote tracking organizations which come out months after the fact, the Rio Grande Foundation’s “Freedom Index” vote tracking tool is finalized and out now. You can find out how your legislators (and others) voted on critical issues of individual freedom.

Every vote relating to financial/economic freedom, education freedom, and your constitutional freedom was rated between -8 for an awful bill and +8 for a great bill and points were assigned in real time as votes occurred. This session there were 3 floor amendments included:

House votes on preserving 4 day school weeks, reducing the personal income tax rate to 1% were included and a Senate vote that would have indexed the Social Security tax to inflation.

Important bills included the paid family leave: SB 3/HB 6 and the “Clean Fuels Standard” HB 41.

Our House winners were: Rep. Candy Ezzell of Roswell followed by John Block of Alamogordo, and Randall Pettigrew of Hobbs.

Winners in the Senate were: Sen. David Gallegos of Hobbs and Greg Schmedes of Albuquerque’s East Mountains who tied followed by Greg Baca of Belen.

Rio Grande Foundation’s president and his wife attended Jerry Seinfeld’s standup comedy event on Friday, Feb. 16 in Albuquerque. While this would typically be nothing more than a fun date night (Seinfeld was great and totally worth seeing), like nearly everything these days, it is political with some relevant concerns relating to the City of Albuquerque.

1. There were dozens of anti-Israel protesters. Seinfeld is Jewish and has expressed support for Israel, but he’s also a private citizen and decidedly NOT in charge of American foreign policy toward Israel. I can only imagine how differently the media would report on these protests if conservatives were protesting Jews or other groups.
2. The protesters were blocking the ONLY entrance to the event (2nd street entrance to the Convention Center). Thankfully no serious altercations occurred, but this situation is completely unnecessary as the 3rd street entrance could have been used as an alternate entry point.
3. Unrelated to the protestors specifically, it is clear the City is not equipped or at least used to hosting major events. The Civic Plaza Parking Garage uses machine payment mechanisms and there simply are not enough of them for a crowd the size of the one that attended Seinfeld. It took a VERY long time to get out of the parking garage (and we attempted to let the crowd thin out).

The 2024 legislative session was destined to be a challenging one for RGF and other supporters of limited government. And, while the New Mexico Legislature is as progressive as it has ever been and must be considered a failure for its lack of interest in addressing basic economic, crime, and education issues, this session may be remembered for the rise of rural, moderate House Democrats as a political check on the “progressives.”

The New Mexico Senate, on the other hand, acted much more as a “rubber stamp” for MLG’s policies. You can check the performance in both houses at our Freedom Index. 

Specifically on HB 41 Clean Fuel Standard which unfortunately passed and SB 3 Paid Family Leave, moderate Democrats pushed back against “progressive” overreach. The floor vote rebuffing the Gov.’s plan to force school districts to adopt 5 day school weeks was another vote that split House Democrats.  Several rural Democrats ALSO opposed HB 129, the 7-day waiting period on gun purchases.

In what can only be described as a massive victory for taxpayers and the New Mexico economy, paid family leave has failed once again in the New Mexico Legislature. This time, the bill failed on the House floor after having comfortably passed the Senate.

If adopted business and employees would have faced higher taxes and there would have been massive challenges in replacing workers who take leave. RGF argued against the plan focusing particularly on the need to not burden businesses at a time of a massive $3.5 billion surplus that COULD be used to fund such a program.

All Republicans opposed the bill and numerous Democrats did as well. You can see from our Freedom Index vote tracking tool that there is a significant ideological rift between moderate Democrats in the House and “progressives.”

For details on the tax omnibus bill we rely on the Legislature’s fiscal impact report. Here is our breakdown of the bill that passed the Senate, has been concurred with by the House, and is on the Gov.’s desk:

In terms of government, the income tax reductions would reduce state revenue by approximately $159,000,000.  That’s a genuine tax cut.

Between the corporate and capital gains tax hikes there $77,000,000 million in tax hikes contained in the bill.

There are also about $140,000,000 worth of targeted tax credits in the bill (this is up dramatically from the $25,000,000 in the House-passed version. Sadly, most of the credits added by the Senate are poor public policy (like $45,000,000 million in EV subsidies, $25,000,000 for the “advanced energy” tax credit, and $20,000,000 for the “solar market development tax credit.”

Overall, the bill reduces taxes by about $82 million annually. That’s a paltry  2 percent of the $3.5 billion surplus returned to New Mexicans.

The final budget bumps spending by 6.8%. That’s $659,000,000 in new spending. That’s more than triple the amount allocated to tax reductions and credits and more than five times the amount dedicated to actual tax reduction (once tax hikes  are factored in).

Based on the “final” budget (pending potential vetoes), here is the spending growth we’ve seen since Gov. Lujan Grisham took office.

In the 2022 legislative session New Mexico dramatically reduced the number of people in the State that pay taxes on their Social Security. This improved upon the previous situation, but according to Money.com, “Only 10 states will still tax benefits: Colorado, Connecticut, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and West Virginia.”

Completely eliminating the Social Security tax would be easy given the State’s $3.5 billion surplus, but with inflation having run rampant since 2022 it is only a matter of time before middle class New Mexico retirees will have to pay the tax.

Sadly, the Senate voted to reject an amendment offered by Sen. Cliff Pirtle (R-Roswell) that would have simply indexed New Mexico’s tax on Social Security to inflation. The following list is the vote on indexing Social Security taxes to inflation which is rated +6 for a Y vote in our Freedom Index (the vote was 20-15). All 15 Senate Republicans voted Yes. 20 Democrats voted “No.” 7 Democrats refused to vote. 

You can watch the floor debate and check the votes for yourself around the 3:50 mark of this video from Feb. 12. Unlike the House, the Senate simply records a roll call vote which we transcribed.

We recently broke down the House-passed tax omnibus package and its minor benefits for New Mexico taxpayers in the form of tax reduction along with tax hikes and various credits. Based on the entirety of the bill, we rated it a “zero” on our Freedom Index.

We didn’t have high expectations that the Senate would improve the bill and we were not disappointed. The Senate (sadly) added in the Gov.’s EV tax credit to further subsidize electric vehicle purchases (a subsidy of $50 million annually). Numerous other “green” tax credits were added into the legislation by the Senate.

Now, the Gov. has mandated EV’s and charging stations and pushed the Legislature to subsidize them.

New Mexico’s legislative session ends on Thursday at noon. Any bill not passed by both houses before then is considered dead for the session. Here are a few bad bills we’re watching:

SB 3 the Paid Family Leave bill which would raise taxes and make doing business in New Mexico harder for businesses could be up on the House Floor for final passage at any time.

HB 41 Clean Fuel Standard: This bill would force various “clean” fuels like ethanol and other biofuels into your gas tank. You can listen to our brand new podcast all about the issue here.  It is currently in Senate Finance Committee before a possible Senate vote for final passage.

HB 48 Raise Royalty rates (taxes) on oil and gas: is up in Senate Finance Committee today. If it passes out it can then be heard on the Senate Floor for final passage.

Find a list of Senate Finance Committee members here. 

On this week’s interview Paul interviews Jim Winchester. Jim is Executive Director of the Independent Petroleum Association of NM. Jim’s group specifically works with smaller oil and gas producers.

Paul and Jim discuss the various ways in which his industry is under attack in the 2024 legislative session. They discuss the economic impact of his industry and whether these attacks are new and what they actually would do to his industry and the environment.

Long before the COVID 19 pandemic we at the Rio Grande Foundation advocated for remote testimony at legislative hearings. Continuation of remote testimony is one of a small number of positives in the post-COVID era.

Alas, as the email traffic below plays out (read top to bottom) we attempted to testify before the Senate Conservation Committee on the morning of Feb. 8 regarding HB 41 (Clean Fuel Standard). Even though Gessing emailed the appropriate contact the day before to testify and was in the Zoom meeting during the public comment portion of the meeting, he was not allowed to participate.

The Legislature should ideally create some basic standards for testimony (both in-person and remote). It is already intimidating enough for people unfamiliar with Zoom to use the technology appropriately.