The US Supreme Court has ruled in Carson v. Makin that states that allow funding to flow to private non-religious schools cannot prohibit funds from also flowing to religious schools. This was a 6-3 decision with Kagan, Sotomayor, and Breyer dissenting.

The Court’s decision seems intuitive enough. Separation of church and state has never meant discriminating against religious institutions when they are in the same space (like education) with non-religious and public players.

As National Review columnist Dan Maclaughlin wrote in his column (linked above), “Allowing students to take state aid to a religious school on the same terms as a secular school does not establish a church, any more than allowing them to use Pell Grants at a religious college or, for that matter, allowing people to buy Bibles with their Social Security checks, establishes a state church.”

So, this is another baby-step towards broader legal acceptance of school choice. All we need in New Mexico is the political courage to actually enact such programs.

The Rio Grande Foundation has been tracking per-pupil spending at Albuquerque Public Schools for several years. We use the simple mathematical technique of dividing the total annual budget by the number of students in the district, a number which has declined dramatically in recent years.

Most APS budgets are here while the 2023 data comes from the following Albuquerque Journal article. There was no APS budget in FY 2021 so we attempted to calculate based on recent trends.

On a PER PUPIL basis, APS spends 64% MORE in FY 2023 than it did in FY 2019.

Recently at RGF we noted the long standing problems with the US federal government’s management of New Mexico lands. This, in light of the forest fires that continue to rage throughout our State.

We were surprised to find this article from the lefty journalism outfit Searchlight New Mexico which included several interviews with people throughout the fire-ravaged regions of our State. The article actually does a good job of bringing attention to the fact that the federal government undertook a massive land grab and has, over the years, removed more and more land from local uses and control.

Here is another choice quote from the article which is worth a read.

We have long argued that the federal government is captured by radical environmentalists and cannot change its approach and thus should devolve management of most Forest Service and BLM lands to New Mexico. We worked with then New Mexico legislator Yvette Herrell on the issue. Alas, getting the federal government to give up its grip on Western lands is a generational challenge. Many Northern New Mexicans clearly understand that Washington is a bad landlord.

Rio Grande Foundation president Paul Gessing recently sat down with KOAT Channel 7 to discuss the recent “no-strings-attached” made by Albuquerque’s City Council to Planned Parenthood.” Whatever one’s views on abortion, it is hugely problematic that City Council has “donated” $250,000 to an activist political organization that actively involves itself in political campaigns.

Story linked above or click on photo below:

Dealing with the homeless situation is challenging. It is a problem in Albuquerque as well as numerous other major American cities. Paul recently sat down with Pastor Mark Green who runs a homeless relief ministry in Roswell. He has a worked with the homeless for years and has some interesting ideas on how to help them and keep them out of public spaces and from taking grocery carts. Even the Department of Corrections could play a role.

Check out this short conversation:

You never know what you’ll find on social media. The following is a Facebook post from New Mexico Senator Siah Correa Hemphill, a Democrat. Interestingly, she is touting an award she received for “supporting the Gov.’s initiatives.”

MLG has never been much for separation of powers considering her ongoing use of New Mexico’s “emergency” laws which have been renewed time and again without legislative participation. Now, the New Mexico Environment Department (under the Gov.’s control) is apparently giving awards to friendly legislators who carry the Gov.’s water on various environmental issues.

Ronchetti wins. Paul & Wally discuss that outcome and other races; Paul recently traveled to Florida for an event with anti-tax advocate Grover Norquist. He discusses the national scene;

Common Cause supports New Mexico’s awful judicial election process. Paul and Wally discuss their issues with it.

ABQ City Council embraces “safe spaces.” Progressive former mayoral candidate Pete Dinelli is spot-on regarding local parks: 

Inflation hits 8.6%, highest in four decades.  The average US gas price hits $5/gallon. 

A new study finds high gas prices hit rural, poor the most (duh). Speaking of inflation, Paul recently spoke to KOAT channel 7 about trash, water, and power fees going up in Albuquerque.

Biden visited New Mexico to offer aid to forest fire victims. A lefty news site actually goes behind the headlines and talks to Northern New Mexicans frustrated by Forest Service mismanagement.

In a seeming conflict of interest, NM Environment Department (headed by MLG) gives out awards to friendly legislators.

Does New Mexico have an education secretary? It is hard to say.

We all know prices are skyrocketing as inflation takes hold of the United States economy. We also know that the State of New Mexico and City of Albuquerque have massively increased spending in their latest budgets (well beyond the rate of inflation).

Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean that government, especially the City, is interested in keeping overall costs and fees down for those paying the bills. RGF’s Paul Gessing spoke to KOAT Channel 7 to discuss the increased costs on your water, trash, and power bills.

After a lengthy and contentious meeting of Albuquerque’s City Council on Monday night a bare majority of 5 councilors embraced “Safe Outdoor Spaces” for the homeless. These are meant to be semi-permanent but secure and functional on-site restrooms and shower facilities.

The impact of this idea has been implemented in Las Cruces and Denver (see detailed information and video here) to name just two places. We all HOPE that these sanctioned encampments will improve the situation, but they could just as easily provide even more of a magnet for so-called “homeless” from other areas.

Pete Dinelli, a strongly liberal former candidate for mayor had an excellent piece questioning why Mayor Keller doesn’t force these campers out of parks. We’d only add that the need to be pushed out of public rights-of-way. Generally speaking, Albuquerque should NOT be a welcoming place for those who are unwilling or unable to accept housing that has been made available.

MORE facilities for the so-called “homeless” won’t solve the problem absent more enforcement. We’ll see if Mayor Keller is willing to do that.

New Mexico’s primaries are in the books. Do you remember voting for the judges?  Do you recognize the names on the ballot and know what they stand for? Were there any contested races? You probably answered “no” to most of those questions. That is not good.

Leave it up to the left-wingers at Common Cause to be perhaps the only people in our State who believe our State’s approach to judicial elections is working. Of course, their justification is that the elections are “clean” insofar as the funding for those campaigns comes from the taxpayers.

The claim with little justification that the system is a “success.” But, anyone who cares about crime would have to be concerned that our judges don’t do a great job of keeping dangerous criminals off the streets.

New Mexico’s judiciary is also considered anti-business. While that MAY reflect the broader political status of the State, it would be nice to have judicial candidates able to run actual campaigns on their positions. This kind of issue-based campaigning is limited in New Mexico. 

Finally, while voters tend to be moderately informed based on a combination of advertising and partisan identification, that is not always available to judicial candidates in New Mexico. So, around election day each year we at the Rio Grande Foundation often received questions regarding the merits of “non-partisan” judicial candidates about whom little is known.

What’s the solution? It would seem that more political advertising and enhancing rather than limiting the ability of judicial candidates to campaign on “tough on crime” or some broad policy reforms would be the best approach, but we  are open to any ideas that would increase openness and result in a better-informed electorate.

As the votes come in on Tuesday night for Republicans  in the race for Gov. and other big races throughout New Mexico, the media has called the race for Mark Ronchetti in what appears to be an overwhelming victory. As of 8:25 in the evening he has 60% of the vote in a five person race.

The primary was hard-fought and more divisive than it had to be. In the view of RGF’s Paul Gessing, all of the candidates were firmly in the “center-right” of the GOP both here in New Mexico and nationwide. Unfortunately, especially in light of the final results, the race got much nastier than it needed to when the goal (shared almost universally by GOP voters as well as many independents and moderate Democrats) is to rid New Mexico of Michelle Lujan Grisham.

So, will the vanquished GOP primary rally around Ronchetti? Will voters? It is hard to say. New Mexico’s GOP is a fractious and fractured bunch, but a lot of New Mexicans believe that failure to defeat an unpopular left-wing governor with an unpopular president in the White House will threaten their ability to EVER win statewide races in New Mexico. We shall see.

Nary a day goes by that doesn’t include some kind of anti-energy outrage from either the Biden Administration or New Mexico’s Democrats. Recently, New Mexico’s Democrat-controlled Legislature killed a bill that would have mandated more ethanol in gas tanks while increasing gas prices at the pump.

Now, the Biden Administration has taken it upon themselves to increase the amount of ethanol in gas tanks nationwide. The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers said “unachievable mandates will increase fuel production costs and keep consumer prices high.” This is yet  another anti-energy Biden Administration policy.

Something new to the author of this post contained in the ABC News piece is that ethanol consumes more than 40% of the nation’s corn supply.

The following is a lengthy post on the numerous problems with ethanol from a crop scientist.

The folks at Yahoo Finance recently took a closer look at Virgin Galactic’s finances. Virgin Galactic is the main tenant at Spaceport America. Here are some conclusions about Virgin Galactic’s business that can be gleaned from the report linked above.

1.) Virgin Galactic won’t break even at Spaceport America before FY 2031;

2.) Virgin Galactic will not meet the User Fee Structure required in the Spaceport America Facilities Lease;

3.) Virgin Galactic will use more than $2 bil to develop reliable passenger service at Spaceport America before FY 2031;

4.) Virgin Galactic will not sell enough tickets to show a profit before 2031;

5.) Virgin Galactic stock is not worth more than six dollars ($6.00) per share.

The liberal New York Times has been one of the primary supporters (and enforcers) of the conventional wisdom on COVID 19. But, at last there is an admission among some at the paper that mask mandates failed. New Mexico Gov. Lujan Grisham, herself an avid supporter of the establishment narrative on COVID had a statewide indoor mask mandate in place for the better part of the two years from March 10, 2020 through Feb 17, 2022 when she finally lifted the mandate.

The Times isn’t completely giving up on the IDEA of masks, just the mandates (full article linked above). Here are a few choice quotes:

After a brief discussion of the “effectiveness” of masks in a laboratory setting on dummies, the article notes:

Finally, after two years (and sometimes more) of mask mandates, the Times concludes with a shockingly (considering its track record) libertarian approach involving individual choice:

As we move beyond a contentious series of primaries in both parties and look to the fall election, it worth highlighting one of the big issues on the fall ballot: the plan to “tap” New Mexico’s permanent fund to provide universal preschool.

As written, voters will decide whether to: “allocate 1.25% of the five-year average of year-end market values of the money in the Land Grant Permanent Fund (LGPF) to early childhood education…” The Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) estimated that the additional allocation would be about $245.7 million in fiscal year 2023. Of that total, $126.9 million would be allocated for early childhood education, $84.6 million to public education, and $34.2 million for the LGPF’s other beneficiaries.

The advocates’ plan is to provide “free,” “universal” pre-K to all New Mexico 3 and 4 year olds.

But, while advocates and supporters tout all kinds of supposed benefits of government-funded pre-K, the best available study of the issue (involving a randomized control) of a similar program that has been in place for years in Tennessee found pre-K actually had NEGATIVE impacts on children.

According to the study, “Children who attended Tennessee’s state-funded voluntary pre-K program during the 2009-10 and 2010-11 school years were doing worse than their peers by the end of sixth grade in academic achievement, discipline issues and special education referrals. The trend emerged by the end of third grade and was even more pronounced three years later.” The following quotes from one of the study authors:

“[We] have let ourselves get into the idea that what these children need is a lot more academic instruction.” Farran said. “And I would say, no, it’s just the opposite. What you would like to give poor children is a feeling of being cared for and being successful.”

While other pre-K studies often seem to show positive results from massive government “investment” in pre-K programs, few of those studies feature a control group. Studies supporting pre-K in New Mexico and elsewhere simply compare voluntarily participating and non-participating students, not those chosen randomly.

As the Rio Grande Foundation has noted in recent  years (and the chart below highlights), Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) has continued to see its budget grow while its student population has shrunk.

Recently, the Albuquerque Journal reported that the APS School board had “balked” at adopting a $1.936 billion budget that would be spent to educate approximately 71,000 students. In FY 2022, the District spent $1,658,589,579 to educate just 72,500 students. That came to $22,877.10. If it had been adopted for FY 2023 along the lines of the numbers above, the District would amount to an incredible $27,267 per student.

The budget is not finalized yet. However, the APS board has limited authority over all the money that is flowing their way. That is largely set in Santa Fe. Either way, the Legislative Finance Committee has clearly stated that the District needs to reform how it does business. The question is whether the Legislature and Governor will push the District to reform itself or simply keep sending money.

On this week’s conversation Paul talks to Clif Horace owner of Horace Motors, a car dealer in Farmington. They discuss the Clean Car Standard that was recently imposed by Gov. Lujan Grisham’s hand picked Environmental Improvement Board.

The Board has imposed rules that will force New Mexico car dealerships to dramatically increase the number of electric vehicles sold in the State. But, California is considering imposing far more aggressive rules that could result in the elimination of internal combustion engines in cars sold in New Mexico.

Listen to this important conversation to find out more about this outrageous situation.

The following letter and books were received by a teacher at Albuquerque Public Schools for their “summer reading.” The books, sent to social studies teachers from NM PED, are of course meant to filter into the classroom in indoctrinating New Mexico students into PED’s new “CRT-laden” social studies standards.

Ibram X. Kendi is a well-known and controversial exponent of CRT. The other book is a history of Native Americans with a nod to the title of Howard Zinn’s “People’s History of the United States,” a radically-negative/leftist take on much of American history. Are these books worth reading? Perhaps. But, our biggest problem with New Mexico’s new CRT-laden social studies standards is not that they teach about America’s warts (slavery/race relations and destruction of Native Americans), but that they emphasize those to the exclusion of other history.

The new standards (and these books) ONLY focus on these things to the exclusion of numerous, more positive aspects of American history of which there are many. May we recommend Larry Schweikart’s “A Patriot’s History of the United States.”

The following appeared in National Review’s Capital Matters on May 26, 2022.

New Mexico just became the 15th state to follow California’s lead in adopting “Clean Car Standards.”

Under New Mexico’s new automobile standards, roughly 7 percent of new cars sold in the state must be zero-emission in 2025. In the latest report available (3rd quarter of 2021) zero-emission vehicles amounted to just 2.29 percent of new vehicle sales in New Mexico. So, to comply with the new rule, sales of zero-emission vehicles will need to more than triple from Q3 of 2021 to 2025.

While the number of states adopting these standards is limited to mostly the West Coast and Northeast so far, anytime a Democrat is elected governor, this kind of policy could be on the table for adoption. That’s because, despite the impact that adopting such policies will have on everything from the automotive to the agricultural sectors, states often don’t need to push these policies through their legislatures for approval.

In New Mexico’s case, Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham these standards through an unelected Environmental Improvement Board. California’s own in states with Democratic governors, this kind of policy could be coming your way if it hasn’t already been put in place.

The real kicker is that by subjecting itself to California’s political whims, New Mexico (and other states adopting these standards) could be forced to adopt even more aggressive “Clean Car” standards soon. California governor Gavin Newsom has issued an executive order that, if adopted by California’s Air Board, would end the sale of gasoline-powered cars in California by 2035. The board’s decision on final adoption of that rule could come in California as early as this August.

Under California’s proposed rule, 35 percent of new cars, SUVs, and small pickups sold in California (and thus other states following their policies) must be zero-emission starting with 2026 models. That number will increase yearly, reaching 51 percent of all new car sales in 2028, 68 percent in 2030, and 100 percent in 2035.

Tripling sales of electric vehicles (EVs) in two years in New Mexico means dealerships will cross-subsidize EVs by raising prices on gasoline vehicles or they will look to the state to further subsidize sales of EVs. This could make gasoline vehicles purchased in states following California more expensive, leading to more car buyers looking out of state. That would result in lost jobs, and tax revenues leaving those states. That situation will get far worse if California adopts the even more aggressive rules now under consideration.

There is nothing inherently wrong with EVs, but there are numerous public-policy implications in their mass deployment, especially if the tool is to simply mandate their sale at the state level.

• Current tax credits and subsidies include a $7,500 federal tax credit and various credits for upgrading connectivity to the electrical grid. Many states also have credits in place. Those credits and subsidies are paid for by shifting costs to taxpayers and utility rate payers, a situation that will worsen dramatically as EVs are forcibly introduced into the market.
• A single EV charging station requires tens of thousands of dollars in upgrades to the electrical grid. A recent report found New Mexico (a big, sparsely-populated state) to have just 401 public charging stations statewide. And those need to be maintained. A recent report from EV-friendly San Francisco found that 27 percent of the Bay-areas charging stations were not functional. Who pays for these charging stations becomes a much more important issue when they become a major component of vehicle fleets.
• And this assumes we have enough electricity to “fuel” a massive new fleet of EVs. New Mexico’s largest utility is keeping its coal-fired power plant open just to keep the lights on and says it won’t have half the solar/battery replacement power needed during the summer of 2023. California’s problems keeping the lights on are well-known, but according to a May 8 Wall Street Journal article, “electric shortage warnings are growing across the United States.” A 2021 New York Times report noted that if all Americans actually replaced their gas-powered vehicles with electrical ones it would increase electricity demand by 25 percent.

Additional issues with the widespread and aggressive adoption of EVs include the need for more mining. Will environmentalists who ostensibly support EVs support the mining of everything from copper to rare-earth minerals to go along with their deployment on a large scale?

Who pays to maintain the roads? It is a relatively simple task to apply a charge to the use of EVs for road maintenance, but politically speaking, owners of EVs are currently favored. Will politicians have the courage to apply fees to electric-vehicle users to pay for the roads?

Few advocates of free markets such as  myself oppose the deployment of EVs. But it should be an organic process driven by market forces, not government mandates and subsidies where the burdens fall on those who cannot afford or have no use for EVs.

Worse, the process of joining California on EVs is being done in the dark, absent the say-so of our democratically elected representatives.

Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation. The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility

On May 16, 2022 Gov. Lujan Grisham renewed her public health order yet again. You can read the full order here.

The Whereas statement below is from page 2 of the Order.

On page 4 of the document is the following statement.

So, which is it? Is there a mistake? We fully expect the order to be renewed yet again whenever it is up, but what date will that be?

The Rio Grande Foundation is doing some research on the shortage of medical professionals in the State and ran across the following chart from Kaiser Family Foundation. We have known for many years that New Mexico has a lot of people on Medicaid, the federal/state health program for the poor.

What’s shocking is that 34% of New Mexicans are on the program. The percent of people on Medicaid in the next-highest state, Louisiana, is “just” 28%. Among New Mexico’s neighbors, 22% of Arizonians are on Medicaid which is the highest among our neighbors. Just 11% of Utahns are on Medicaid. It is unsurprising that Utah has a very high workforce participation rate while New Mexico’s is quite low.

New Mexico policymakers have tremendous financial incentives to boost Medicaid participation. The State receives a 74% federal match on traditional Medicaid Services and a 90% match on services provided under the “ObamaCare” expansion.

A few weeks ago we posted in this space regarding the unsolved issues facing New Mexico’s electrical grid moving forward and that PNM was going to struggle to replace the coal-fired San Juan Generating Station when it shuts down after this summer.

The following was posted by PNM on its Facebook page on Monday, May 23rd, 2022. Presumably these 700 MW will need to be steady “base load” power, not JUST wind or solar, but with battery backup.  Or, a natural gas peaking station. By way of comparison, the San Juan Generating Station coal plant generates 847 MW currently.

Anyone got a spare 700 MW of power sitting around for next summer? Anyone feel comfortable that PNM will find the power it needs? Seems like at the very least your electric bill is on the way up.

All of this is driven by Gov. Lujan Grisham’s pet Energy Transition Act.

At the Rio Grande Foundation we decried Gov. Lujan Grisham’s school “lockdown” policy from the start of the 2020-2021 school year once it was scientifically-accepted that classrooms and schools were not primary vectors of COVID 19.

Unfortunately, unions and Gov. MLG did not pay attention to “the science” and kept New Mexico schools in “virtual” mode until they were reopened to full-time, in-person learning on April 5, 2021. That made New Mexico’s lock-out longer than all but 5 other states’. Shamefully, as the following from the New York Times (using data from researchers at Harvard’s Center for Education Policy Research points out, schools with high numbers of poor and minority students were most likely to go remote prompting a Harvard researcher to say, “This will probably be the largest increase in educational inequity in a generation.”

Gov. Lujan Grisham recently continued her attempt to simultaneously keep the oil and gas revenue spigot flowing while enacting enough policies from the radical environmental agenda to placate her political and fundraising base.

Her latest plan, known as the Clean Car Rule, was adopted by her handpicked Environmental Improvement Board (EIB). Governor-appointed boards are far more willing to do what they are told than are unruly and sometimes uncooperative (albeit overwhelmingly Democrat) legislative bodies with their own political calculations and aspirations.

Incredibly, New Mexico’s newly Clean Car Rule undermines democracy and self-government (along with our economy) by placing New Mexico automobile regulations under the control of another state, California. The current rules are California’s and if California changes them, New Mexico will have to go along with them or reverse course and opt out.

New Mexico’s new automobile standards will require roughly 7% of new cars sold in the State to be zero emission in 2025. In the latest report available (3rd quarter of 2021) zero emission vehicles amounted to just 2.29% of new vehicle sales in New Mexico. So, to comply with the new rule, sales of zero emission vehicles will need to just more than triple from Q3 of 2021 to 2025.

But the real kicker is by subjecting itself to California’s political whims New Mexico could be forced to adopt even more aggressive “Clean Car” standards soon. California Gov. Gavin Newsom has issued an  executive order that, if adopted, would end the sale of gas-powered cars in California by 2035. Final adoption of that rule could come in California as early as this August.

If California enacts this rule, 35% of new cars, SUVs and small pickups sold in California (and thus New Mexico) must be zero-emission starting with 2026 models. That number will increase yearly, reaching 51% of all new car sales in 2028, 68% in 2030 and 100% in 2035.

“Just” tripling sales of electric vehicles (EV’s) in two years in New Mexico means dealerships will cross-subsidize EV’s by raising prices on gasoline vehicles or they will look to the State to further subsidize sales of “chosen” vehicles. This could make gasoline vehicles purchased in New Mexico more expensive leading to purchases made at out-of-state car dealers. That would result in lost jobs and tax revenues in New Mexico. That situation will get much worse if California (and New Mexico) adopt the even more aggressive rules being considered.

Current tax credits and subsidies include a $7,500 federal tax credit and various credits for upgrading connectivity to the electrical grid further help with deployment of electric vehicles. Of course, those credits and subsidies are paid for by increasing costs on taxpayers and utility rate payers.

Deployment of EV charging stations will be another expense associated with this plan. A recent report found New Mexico to have just 401 public charging stations statewide. And those need to be maintained. A recent report from EV-friendly San Francisco found that 27 percent of the Bay-areas charging stations were not functional.

All of this comes at a time when New Mexico’s largest utility (PNM) is keeping its coal fired power plant open just to keep the lights on and says it won’t have half the solar/battery replacement power needed to keep the lights on during the summer of 2023.

There are so many problems and costs with a drastic shift toward electric vehicles that at the very least New Mexico’s elected Legislature should have had a say, but instead we have a Governor in a tight reelection battle who wants to make big promises to environmental groups and their funders no matter how disruptive or damaging to New Mexicans and their livelihoods.

The fact is that the real costs of these unrealistic and damaging policies will be borne after this election. Sadly, that is all by design.

Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation. The Rio Grande Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility