Remember when liberals (both here in New Mexico and around the nation) were ripping into Kristi Noem (SD) and Ron DeSantis (FL) for their supposedly poor management of COVID. For a taste, check out this particularly bad piece by Milan Simonich of the Santa Fe New Mexican and see comments from the “illustrious” Liz Thomson below (who repeatedly used the Twitter hashtag #deathsantis this fall as a COVID wave hit Florida.

Well, according to the COVID tracking site World o Meters, South Dakota now has a lower “COVID deaths per million” than New Mexico and if trends continue for another week or so, Florida will soon slip below New Mexico as well (see below). Both South Dakota and Florida have been MUCH more open economically and in terms of their schools than has New Mexico.

In fact, MLG has followed the failed leftist playbook of masking, social distancing, and hectoring people about vaccines. She has NOT pushed treatments such as monoclonal antibodies or addressed obesity as a leading risk factor as Ron DeSantis has.

You can see both the deaths per million number below in the far right column and also see the trend which favors Florida in particular, a much higher-population state than New Mexico.

On Friday the US Supreme Court held a special hearing to hear a case on Joe Biden’s COVID mandates on businesses of 100 or more employees.

Having watched the Supreme Court do its work for decades, it has always been OUR assumption that while we may disagree with justices on their decisions, these are at least well-informed people who simply read the law/Constitution differently. Friday’s hearing proved a disheartening display of flat-out ignorance (not just of the law, but of basic facts involving COVID 19) that have thrown our faith in yet another American institution into doubt.

Justice Sotomayor’s failure to grasp basic facts was striking regarding basic COVID issues. She said:

• We have over 100,000 children, which we’ve never had before, in serious condition, and many on ventilators.” In reality, the current seven-day average for this age group is 766 hospitalizations.
• “Omicron just as dangerous as Delta” when in reality early studies show Omicron to be less deadly;
• And, more fundamentally on the legal front, she failed to grasp why a state “I’m not sure I understand the distinction why the states would have the power [to institute a mandate such as OSHA’s], but the federal government wouldn’t,” (police powers).

Justice Breyer jumped in claiming that the US had “750 million new cases” of coronavirus on Thursday not realizing apparently that the US has about 335 million people.

Finally, Justice Elena Kagan claimed misguidedly that “The best way” to prevent the spread of Covid-19 was “for people to get vaccinated” when in reality the vaccines have done little to “stop the spread” (which is at record levels right now despite high vaccine rates) and instead do seem to mitigate against the worst outcomes of the Virus.

If the Court were to rule in support of this vaccine mandate it would be one of the most sweeping expansions of federal executive power in American history. The Court has ruled in favor of state-level vaccine mandates and unfortunately refused to hear New Mexico’s (also misguided) vaccine mandate which was implemented by MLG on her own without the Legislature, but has NEVER allowed such a sweeping mandate at the federal level imposed by the President, let alone without Congress which should be the basic minimum required by the Supreme Court for ANY major new policy. Better still, they should read the Constitution which grants LIMITED power to the federal government.

RGF president Paul Gessing recently sat down with Channel 7 KOAT to discuss  the Gov.’s budget. The original interview covered a variety of issues within the budget but wound up being JUST about the law enforcement component.

While most New Mexicans, especially those in crime-plagued Albuquerque, support the hiring and retention of law enforcement, Gessing was actually referring to the fact that Gov. MLG’s budget has a “slight” increase in funding for Department of Corrections while the Legislature’s budget CUTS funding. The assertion is that New Mexico’s prison population is declining and therefore less money is needed.

It is all well and good to cut funding for corrections, but with violent crime at record levels in Albuquerque, it would seem like violent offenders should be filling up those prison cells…but perhaps the courts are not doing THEIR jobs? Either way, that conversation was left on the proverbial cutting room floor. Click on the image below for the story.

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) is a conservative group of state legislators from all over the country. They share policy success (and failures) and create model bills based on concepts that have worked in one or more states that legislators might want to introduce elsewhere.

The exist in New Mexico although given our “deep blue” politics, you’d have to look hard to find any ALEC policies that have made their way into legislation.  But, a new report by Art Laffer and Jonathan Williams (a previous RGF luncheon guest) ranks the nation’s 50 governors on a few basic metrics and finds Lujan Grisham to be the VERY worst governor in the entire country.

Policies included various economic and education policy issues including education freedom, interstate migration, welfare dependency, and unemployment rates.

It is no surprise at all that Lujan Grisham is the worst Gov. in the nation. RGF has postulated in the past that upon taking office she took every policy RGF supported and advocated doing the opposite. And then she locked down New Mexico’s economy and kept struggling New Mexico kids out of school for a year due to her misguided “Zero-COVID” mindset.

The BEST Gov. in the nation in the report is Kristi Noem of South Dakota who famously kept her state open during COVID.  You can read the full report below:

A fun way to “get your name in the paper” at Rio Grande Foundation involves being the subject of an “off the wall” attack from some left-wing group or another. Take today’s Albuquerque Journal which included this from Michael Jensen of Conservation Voters New Mexico. His piece is a (sort of) response to the following (which also appeared in the Journal) in which RGF pushed back against the “Energy Transition Act.” That legislation was passed in 2019 and exclusively deals with forcing New Mexico utilities to transition to wind and solar in coming years, arguing (as PNM has) that the utility is going to struggle to keep the lights on as utilities are forced to abandon reliable fossil fuels.

There are too many silly points made in Jensen’s column to fully address them in a coherent way, but he spends considerable time arguing about oil and gas. Oil and gas are only tangentially related to New Mexico’s Energy Transition Act. In fact, the law forces NM utilities to abandon fossil fuels (mostly coal and natural gas) and even nuclear from electricity generation. The ETA DOES NOT deal with motor vehicles or other fossil fuels.

As the graph below clearly. illustrates, a vast majority of the electricity generated in New Mexico comes from coal and natural gas. smaller (albeit growing) amounts are derived from wind and solar, but coal and natural gas are being targeted for total elimination.

On this week’s interview, Paul talks to Carla Sonntag. Carla is CEO of the New Mexico Business Coalition, a pro-business activism group that works on public policy in New Mexico. Paul and Carla discuss the Coalition’s activities and the issues it covers. Specifically, Carla and Paul address the Coalition’s interest in energy issues from the oil and gas industry to utilities. Finally, they address the push by some legislators to take over PNM (and others) and create a new statewide government-owned utility monopoly to carry out the radical green agenda.

The following op-ed appeared in the Las Cruces Sun-News on December 28, 2021.

Recently, Gov. Lujan Grisham posted on Facebook in support of her plan for a small .25 percentage point reduction in the State’s gross receipts tax rate, saying, “Lower taxes would enable them to grow their business and hire more people, including local adults with special needs that they focus on employing – and we’re going to make it happen.”

It sounded almost like something we at the free-market Rio Grande Foundation would write and

the Gov.’s statement is true as far as it goes. While we support ANY effort to lower tax burdens on New Mexicans, Lujan Grisham’s plan for a small .25 percentage point reduction in the State’s GRT is totally inadequate and clearly driven by her coming reelection and the fact that she faces a very tough race.

According to the Gov., her plan would cut taxes by $145 million annually. But since she took office, Lujan Grisham has signed tax hikes totaling more than $250 million annually. She also conveniently omits the fact that the oil and gas industry has created a $1.6 billion surplus, the likes of which New Mexico has never seen. Clearly given the economic trials facing average New Mexicans, we deserve much more than a tiny tax cut that fails to even make up for her past tax hikes.

The very same thing the Gov. claims about lower taxes helping people grow their businesses were said in opposition to tax hikes she signed into law in 2019 (HB 6) and 2021 (SB 317). Among the tax hikes passed in these bills were hikes in personal income, motor vehicle, hospital, and health insurance taxes. Clearly, as with gross receipts taxes, much of the burden of these tax hikes is also borne by businesses and affects their ability to hire and grow their businesses.

Worse, none of these tax hikes were necessary. The 2019 tax hikes were passed at a time of record budget surpluses alongside an 11 percent budget increase. The 2021 tax hike was a blatant revenue grab. The Democrat-controlled Legislature and Gov. Lujan Grisham were presented with an opportunity to generate millions of additional tax dollars by re-imposing (and retaining the proceeds from) a federal health insurance tax that had been repealed by the Trump Administration.

Simply allowing the federal government’s health insurance tax (imposed under ObamaCare) to go away would have had the very same positive impacts on businesses and their bottom lines as any other tax reduction, but that wasn’t an election year. This is.

Directly imposing higher taxes is only one of numerous ways in which government makes doing business harder than necessary. In her time in office Lujan Grisham signed a new medical malpractice law that doctors and other medical professionals say will cause them to close or leave. The Energy Transition Act has already begun increasing electricity costs and PNM is concerned about reliability as soon as next summer due to the closure of San Juan Generating Station.

While the Gov. is busy positioning herself as a pro-business “tax cutter” she is also pushing a new “Clean Fuel Standard” that, based on a draft of the bill, would increase gasoline prices by 35 cents per gallon. Every New Mexico business and resident (even if they drive an electric vehicle) would see further price hikes above and beyond current inflation if that bill becomes law.

Sadly, the impact of these anti-business law is to keep New Mexico poor. It is no surprise that New Mexico has one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation despite the massive oil and gas surplus.

Lujan Grisham’s management of New Mexico’s economy both before and throughout the Pandemic have been abysmal and her claim to be a pro-business “tax cutter” are laughable.

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

Free market conservatives often point to the popularity of their ideas (as applied in the various states). Over many years people have moved from high tax, high regulation states, to lower tax, lower regulation states. This is largely a search for greater economic freedom.

But, during the Pandemic that has gripped the US and policymakers over the past year, economic freedom has also come to include things like: the ability to send your child to school in-person, businesses staying open, no mask requirements, and numerous other factors. These factors have particularly increased the importance of state governors who have driven COVID policies.

Here are the Census figures upon which the following analysis is based. New Mexico is the only Southwest state to have lost migrants during the period reported (July 2020 to July 2021). New Mexico has also had the strictest pandemic rules AND far less economic freedom than our neighbors.

Notably, while the three VERY BLUE states with large populations saw massive population losses (CA, NY, and IL), even North Carolina and Nevada which are considered “blue” and MD and MA which are considered “red” based on governors hardly fit those profiles based on actual governance.

The following chart shows WHY people are leaving when it comes to specific (non-COVID) policies. You can read the full policy analysis from Mark Perry at American Enterprise Institute here. 

COVID cases are at record levels nationwide seemingly due to Omicron. Paul’s family recently got COVID. Here’s what he experienced.

On Friday SCOTUS will hear cases challenging the Biden vaccine mandate. A national media figure FINALLY makes the case against covid lockdowns and their impact on kids.

Happy 2022. What is going to happen in 2022?

Las Cruces’ new ban on plastic bags takes effect on New Year’s Day. Patrick Brenner addresses ABQ’s (revised) plastic bag ban in ABQ Journal.

RGF appeals an important free speech case to the US Supreme Court. The latest left-wing fantasy is to make PNM a public utility.

Paul and Wally take a closer look at NM’s unemployment rate and population migration data from the Census Bureau.

For the second time in just over a week (here’s another), a major media outlet has talked about the serious issues facing our children related to COVID 19 (unfortunately they don’t tend to focus specifically on government response to the pandemic, but focus on the pandemic itself).

Today’s warning comes from the New York Times, a leading lockdown proponent. The story (below) outlines some of the notable issues:

As reported by the Piñon Post, a lawsuit has been filed  by the former Chief Financial Officer at Spaceport America against Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham over alleged fraud of $200 million.

The complaint names 21 individuals who participated in a conspiracy including leaders at the highest levels of state government including Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, Attorney General Hector Balderas, New Mexico State Auditor Brian Colón, Economic Development Cabinet Secretary Alicia Keys, and current managers at Spaceport America.” 

“The complaint provides evidence of extortion, bribery, illegal drug use, sex discrimination, procurement fraud, securities fraud, and multiple violations of federal law. The complaint describes how after I left, the defendants proceeded to commit over $200 million in fraud when they issued bonds under false pretenses with disclosure documents containing fraudulent information.” 

At the Rio Grande Foundation we have long criticized taxpayer support of the Spaceport and we recently expressed concern over taxes that SHOULD be collected at the facility.

A serious, systemic issue in New Mexico is that the Spaceport and similiar taxpayer-funded “enterprises” and industries provide ample opportunity for the kind of corruption New Mexico is known for. This lawsuit is only the latest “boot” to drop. We continue to look into the facility and its finances.

Welcome to 2022! While the number on the calendar may have changed, for New Mexico economically and policy-wise, we don’t foresee much positive on the horizon in terms of public policies from the current Gov. or Legislature, but we DO have questions that we believe will dominate public policy in New Mexico during 2022. Here they are:

1. 1. More of the same on MLG’s COVID policies?: Gov. Lujan Grisham has consistently been among the very most restrictive governors when it comes to COVID. And, while (so far) the Omicron variant hasn’t “blown up” in New Mexico (yet) it is likely on the way. Will Omicron or the impending election impact MLG’s COVID policies or will New Mexicans remain masked with further vaccine mandates through 2022?
   2. Will the Gov. and Legislature really increase gasoline prices in the 2022 session? MLG has proposed “Clean Fuel Standard” legislation for the upcoming session which would increase gas prices by an estimated 35 cents per gallon. With gas prices above $3.00 a gallon throughout New Mexico and heading into an election year, this seems like a politically-problematic idea to say the least.
   3. Albuquerque’s violent crime and homeless problems spiraled out of control under Mayor Tim Keller and the “progressive”-controlled City Council in 2021. Will Mayor Keller act on these issues or will a more centrist City Council be able to address the issues?
   4. Will oil and gas keep New Mexico “in the black” and will the money do any good? Yes, this is essentially two questions, but with the State experiencing unprecedented levels of oil and gas money flowing into the State budget, this is an “evergreen” question. The Legislature is expected to pass MLG’s small GRT reduction, but may modify the proposal. Will that reduction or any of the other spending alleviate any of New Mexico’s numerous problems?
   5. Will the GOP be able to unseat MLG and make gains in the Legislature or is New Mexico destined to be an impoverished version of California? MLG has been the most radical and incompetent governor in decades. And while not on the ballot himself, President Biden hasn’t covered himself in glory either. The GOP has a solid field of contenders for Gov. Can one of them break through? If not, it is hard to see a better opportunity to FINALLY (after 90 years) begin the long process of reforming New Mexico.

As usual, RGF will be working hard on behalf of greater freedom in 2022, but November’s elections will ultimately determine whether 2022 is a good year for freedom.

The following article by Rio Grande Foundation Vice President Patrick Brenner appeared in the Albuquerque Journal on December 30, 2021.

With food prices on the rise, Albuquerque is again changing the rules for shopping bags. The Mayor Tim Keller administration will now mandate that stores offer only those with “stitched handles.” But these bags have a dirty secret: the vast majority are made of plastic. All this policy is likely to accomplish is to drive up costs for struggling businesses. Those costs will be passed on to consumers.

In an interview, City Councilor Pat Davis said the new rules are necessary because stores were handing out thicker reusable plastic bags – an alleged “loophole.” So, the city came up with a solution: require bags be at least 4 mils thick and to have stitched handles.

But here’s the funny part. The reusable plastic bags that drew Davis’ ire were about half as thick as the new, seemingly random 4 mil standard. Only in Albuquerque could the government double the thickness of plastic bags as an attempt to eliminate them from stores.

Aside from being thicker, these “stitched handle” bags, the kind retailers sell for a couple of dollars at checkout counters, are made from such plastics as polypropylene, nylon and polyethylene terephthalate. Most are imported from bag manufacturers based in some of the world’s worst polluting countries. Research from Denmark’s Environmental Protection Agency actually found that these stitched bags have larger environmental impacts than the bags they are supposed to replace.

While this ludicrous ban is just another case of government intervention delivering the exact opposite of what was promised, it is no laughing matter for small businesses and struggling families.

As costs soar for everything due to supply chain disruptions, labor challenges, shortages and inflation, they can expect another hit considering that the newly mandated bags are significantly more expensive than what had been allowed previously. When retailers can get their hands on bags, consumers can expect those costs to translate to higher costs – and getting bags is no sure thing.

In recent weeks, communities as far flung as Anchorage, Alaska, and North Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, voted to suspend their bag bans as stores struggle to find affordable alternative products. In Washington state, small businesses report similar issues trying to comply with their bag ban, which allows for more flexibility than Albuquerque’s new “stitched-handles” rule.

While one or two dollars every time a shopper forgets their bag may not seem like much to some, this policy represents a regressive tax on our most vulnerable neighbors. With inflation the worst it has been in at least three decades, our leaders should be focused on ways to help struggling families, not piling up additional costs on folks trying to put food on the table.

Whether from an environmental or an economic perspective, the latest diktats from the Mayor’s Office appear likely to do more harm than good. Maybe it’s time for the newly elected City Council to just throw the entire anti-environment, anti-freedom plastic bag ban out and restore consumer choice.

The Rio Grande Foundation is New Mexico’s free-market research institute and think tank. An advocate for open government, Patrick Monroe Brenner leads the foundation’s government transparency and accountability efforts.

From day one the Rio Grande Foundation has questioned the “lockdown/masking” approach to COVID 19 espoused by Gov. Lujan Grisham and numerous other (predominantly) “blue state” governors around the nation. We’ve been especially concerned about the impact these policies, including the amount of classroom time lost.

This video is absolutely worth a moment of your time because it is one of the few times we’ve seen the “lockdown” approach questioned in a national media outlet.

“They will be paying for our generation’s decisions the rest of their lives”: @JanCBS explains why she thinks 2021’s biggest underreported story was the devastating impact of COVID policies on children pic.twitter.com/AUU1f6AFNi

— Face The Nation (@FaceTheNation) December 26, 2021

The Arizona-based Goldwater Institute recently filed briefs asking the U.S. Supreme Court to hear the Rio Grande Foundation’s lawsuit against a Santa Fe ordinance that forces nonprofits to surrender their donors’ privacy rights whenever they support or oppose a ballot initiative. The case is just the latest in a series of cases in which donors to think tanks and nonprofits have been targeted by anti-privacy mandates nationwide.

The lawsuit began in 2017 when the Rio Grande Foundation announced its opposition to a proposal to impose a sales tax on sugared soft drinks in Santa Fe. The Foundation posted a video to its Facebook page—a video it didn’t make—that urged voters to oppose the initiative. That triggered a city ordinance that requires nonprofits that spend more than $250 supporting or opposing initiatives to turn over the names, addresses, and employment information of any donor who gave even a penny for that purpose. Even though the Foundation had not spent any money on the video, city bureaucrats decided that the video must have cost that much, and therefore that it qualified as an “in-kind donation.” It concluded that the Foundation was required to put its donors’ confidential information on a publicly accessible government list.

Goldwater took up Rio Grande’s case, filing suit to argue that stripping the Foundation’s supporters of their privacy in this way was likely to scare away donors—something lawyers call a “chilling effect” on free speech rights. And we proved at trial that when other, similar organizations, have been forced to turn over their private information, their employees and supporters have suffered intimidation and harassment. That’s not news—as the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Americans for Prosperity v. Bonta made clear, the risk of retaliation when people have their private information made public is a real one—and it does cause people to refrain from exercising their First Amendment rights.

But the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals threw the case out earlier this year, in a bizarre holding that said people cannot bring a “chilling effect” lawsuit unless they themselves choose not to exercise their freedom of speech. In other words, the court said that because the Rio Grande Foundation intends to speak out in the future, it’s not allowed to argue that the Santa Fe ordinance will likely scare donors into silence.

That makes no sense, because, as the Tenth Circuit itself has said in other cases, the fact that someone is willing to keep speaking despite risk of punishment doesn’t deprive that person of the right to challenge the constitutionality of punishment. For example, in a 2019 case—also from New Mexico—federal courts ruled that a professor who was retaliated against for speaking out about improprieties at her school could still sue even though she “show[ed] extraordinary persistence” and refused to be silenced.

Yet in Rio Grande’s case, the court created a new rule holding that “an element of a chilled speech injury is an actual intention not to speak,” meaning that only a person who is afraid to speak, but not afraid to sue, is allowed to bring a First Amendment lawsuit. That’s illogical—and likely to slam the courthouse doors to many people and organizations who should be allowed to defend their constitutional rights.

We urge the Supreme Court to take up this case and vindicate Rio Grande’s freedom of speech.

You can read our petition here and learn more about the case here.

Here’s the video that started it all.

Fresh off their defeat of the PNM/Avangrid merger (an effort on which we didn’t disagree with them), the radicals at New Energy Economy are pushing a far more concerning plan. They want to make ALL utilities government-run. A group of more than a dozen far-left legislators (list on page 5 of the document above) has petitioned the Public Regulation Commission to “study” the issue.

Reading through the proposal it is no surprise that this is part of a push to hasten the abandonment of “traditional” energy sources in favor of unreliable wind and solar. As frustrating as PNM’s government-regulated monopoly model may be, the thought of these people running a utility is even more frightening.

Ironically, as is so often the case with government-ownership of ANYTHING, the real question is WHO owns it. Right here in New Mexico the City of Farmington owns and manages its own utility. That is the entity pushing to keep the coal-fired San Juan Generating Station open and use  carbon capture technology to do it.

There is nothing to be done at this point. If this proposal is adopted, the PRC will study the issue. Nonetheless, the LAST thing New Mexico needs is a new area of our economy for the State to manage, especially along the lines proposed by the most radical “environmentalists.”

Perhaps the PRC should ALSO undertake a study of what a free market utility market might look like, especially one untethered from the Energy Transition Act.

New Mexico’s unemployment rate in November 2021 is now 6.2%. That’s 5th-highest in the nation and worst than each of our neighbors. The data are available here from Bureau of Labor Statistics.

No matter how interesting or promising a technology developed in New Mexico may be, it seems that government inevitably gets involved and mucks things up. Take Sceye.

The idea behind the company which is Swiss, but with major operations here in New Mexico, is to provide Internet and other services to remote locations using dirigibles or blimps. That’s a fine idea and I’d love to see it taken from concept to application (without fleecing New Mexico taxpayers).

But, in her bid to deploy broadband across New Mexico, Gov. Lujan Grisham and the Democrat-controlled Legislature are spending an astonishing $70 million for just five blimps.  Mind you this is an unproven technology as the company JUST performed its first and only test flight in October of 2021. New Mexico ALSO gave the company $3.2 million to study the concept of dirigible-based Internet service in April of 2021, so the company is cashing a lot of checks from the State.

While Sceye is hardly the only entity working on deploying Internet service to far-flung rural areas (Elon Musk’s Starlink system is one big competitor), it is difficult to see New Mexico’s massive “investment” as cost-effective. According to Rio Grande Foundation calculations, $70 million would get 2,500 miles of deployed broadband (without the risk of investing tax dollars in an unproven technology) thus offering broadband to many rural providers for whom access is unavailable. Furthermore, based on the $1 billion hybrid model (fiber/fixed wireless) to the “un-served” areas of New Mexico in which such Internet service is unavailable, spending on Sceye comes out to $8,000 per-person.

That’s an expensive way for New Mexico to deploy broadband service!

The City of Albuquerque has some nice parks. It also has some parks that need a little “TLC” and then there are others (like Coronado Park) that have been completely overrun by “homeless” campers.

No matter what you think about the City’s homeless policy, it would seem that public parks are not an appropriate place to simply hand over to the homeless. In New York City (not known as a bastion of free market policies by any stretch) managing the limited green space is of utmost concern. So, the City works with private companies to manage the parks.

Not only are the homeless kept at bay, but there are numerous amenities available that make these New York parks economically-beneficial to their surrouning areas. Check out this short video.

On this week’s podcast conversation, Paul sits down with Jennifer Rivera, MA Ed. Jennifer is the Executive Director of Estancia Valley Classical Academy which is part of Hillsdale College’s Barney Charter School Initiative. Jennifer is a return guest and we discuss what makes her charter school unique, the fact that the school just received a 5-year extension on its charter, and the challenges students and families have been dealing with during COVID.

In this in-depth and candid discussion, we discuss lost learning (even at a high-performing school) and how teachers, families, and students alike have dealt with the mental health challenges during the pandemic, the impact of broadband access, and of course the Gov.’s masking mandates. If you are concerned about education in New Mexico, don’t miss this conversation.

New Mexico has always struggled with low workforce participation levels. It was hardly a surprise when a national study earlier this year called New Mexico the “least hardworking state” in the entire nation. The COVID 19 pandemic AND the federal/state governments’ fear mongering, mask and vaccine mandates and massive social spending programs have done nothing to lure people back into the workforce.

Alas, as the chart below shows (using data from Bureau of Labor Statistics) New Mexico’s workforce participation rate has remained depressed even relative to other state. In January of 2020 the rate for NM was 55.5%. As of October 2021 that rate was 53.3% , a decrease of 4%.

Not only did New Mexico START with lower workforce participation than its neighbors, but it has seen a the steepest decline of any of its neighboring states. No state has gotten back to January 2020 workforce participation rates, but Oklahoma and Utah have gotten close.

The Spaceport and its primary tenant Virgin Galactic have always been secretive when it comes to their finances. Perhaps the taxpayer-funded facility and its main tenant are embarrassed by the fact that the facility has open for more than a decade without having been used for its intended purpose.

In New Mexico, gross receipts tax (GRT) is applied to all financial transactions unless the Legislature specifically calls them out for an exemption or deduction.

A ruling from the State of New Mexico Tax and Revenue Department does provide a “deduction from GRT which includes receipts from launching, operating or recovering space vehicles or payloads in New Mexico.” Tax deductions cannot be taken on the assumption that someday the Spaceport will engage in these activities. Rather, if launch, operation, or recovery trigger the deduction, then ticket sales should be taxed and there should be records of those taxes being collected and distributed to the State of New Mexico.

Despite the fact that Virgin Galactic has repeatedly reported to the press and filed documents stating that it has sold (or accepted hundreds of non-refundable deposits on) seats on space launches, there have been no taxes collected or reported (using the Tax and Revenue Department’s CRS-1 form) outlining either GRT paid OR deductions taken. Virgin Galactic has already pre-sold some 700 space tickets: 600 between 2005 and 2014, and another 100 since August, when they were relisted for a price of $450,000. Approximately, 100 people have put down $150,000 in deposits since ticket sales were reopened at $450,000 per seat.

According to the Company’s SEC filings, in the 3^rd quarter of 2021 Virgin Galactic reported revenues of $2.58 million, but reported no GRT payments (or deductions taken) to the State of New Mexico. RGF has also researched potential GRT payments by Virgin Galactic to the State of New Mexico and as seen no payments or accounting for those deductions.

“Lame duck” Albuquerque City Council is at it again. Fresh off a big giveaway to local labor unions, the “lame duck” progressives on city council are pushing a big subsidy for the University of New Mexico. Specifically, the subsidy is for redevelopment of property and the subsidy would be given to the university’s “redevelopment corporation.”

The vehicle for the subsidy is a “Tax Increment Development District,” or TIDD.

The deal works like this: Albuquerque diverts future property tax revenue increases from a defined area within the city toward the UNM improvement project. Because the subsidy is not appropriated directly from the city’s budget, the city will incur the immediate loss through forgone tax revenue. The funding is created by the borrowing against future increases in property-tax revenues. Long story short, it’s a bad idea: taxpayers and property owners all draw the short straw while UNM sees a major influx of cash.

Being considered is 2,491,300 square feet of building improvements–with $136,500,000 of $300,000,000 being tax-exempt and subsidized. This directly benefits UNM and its development arm at the expense of taxpayers throughout the city. Why is $136 million in “building improvements” being given to a tax-exempt university? Isn’t that the purpose of the bonds we already vote for?

The issue is being considered by vote of the city council on December 20th and I need you to write an email to Albuquerque City Council to urge their opposition to the deal. I’ve already drafted the email for you: all you need to do is click on the link and press send.

>> Click here to write an email to Albuquerque City Council. <<

Or you can write your own message using cabq@riograndefoundation.org. This email gets forwarded to all members of the city council.

A local activist has been working with the Rio Grande Foundation on this issue. He wrote an article in the Albuquerque Journal that identifies the major concerns with the proposal. I encourage you to read his piece here. (https://www.abqjournal.com/2442578/300m-for-tidd-is-public-finance-on-steroids.html)

Help us stop this “lame duck” Council from pushing through even more bad policy on its way out the door!

Last week saw the final runoff votes in Albuquerque’s City Council races. Wally and Paul discuss the results and the fact that another “lame duck” city council meeting on December 20 could result in a generous TIDD for UNM.

The special session is still going on in Santa Fe. What’s the status of those maps? Paul and Wally discuss. An issue regarding medical malpractice got added to the agenda. Wally and Paul discuss what is happening.

The full PRC has rejected the Avangrid/PNM merger on a 5-0 vote. Where to next?

A new Wallethub report highlights MLG’s ongoing failure on unemployment.

RGF files a formal complaint with the AG’s office regarding MLG’s travel to Scotland.

Covid cases really are declining now in New Mexico.

Polis: “The emergency is over.” 

MLG: Extends mask mandate to January 7. 

California re-imposes a universal indoor mask mandate. So does New York.

The ABQ Journal editorializes on vaccine mandate at Pit. While RGF does NOT support vaccine mandates, we DO question the double standard imposed by MLG regarding forced vaccination and boosters for UNM students and faculty, but no vaccine for basketball fans.