As has been widely reported in the media, Albuquerque Public Schools on Wednesday, introduced a whole host of restrictions on various activities at their schools.

Here’s a list of the new rules:

• Wearing properly fitted masks outdoors as well as indoors
• Students facing one way in classrooms and the cafeteria
• Keeping students in cohorts
• No spectators at school events, including athletics, through Feb. 2
• Prohibiting large group gatherings, including assemblies
• Staggering transition times and recesses
• Closing drinking fountains (though students can still fill water bottles)
• Restricting locker use.

Needless to say, not only is the RGF not a fan of several of these measures (masking outdoors?) but at the VERY least we believe that the new APS Board should be making these policies, NOT the superintendent  or any unelected bureaucrat. Board member Peggy Mueller-Aragon motioned for a vote on the new rules to be placed on the Board’s agenda at their next meeting which will be in two weeks. We will be keeping an eye on this.

So, here are RGF president’s Paul Gessing’s comments:

I was very happy to see the changes made to the board in the last election and I hope you will act quickly to wrest control over the District away from the bureaucrats.

I am the parent of three children who, up until the end of the abbreviated 2019-2020 school year, attended Chaparral Elementary on Albuquerque’s west side. We pulled our children out of APS for the 2020-2021 “virtual” school year and home schooled them because we knew that they would receive a vastly inferior education. Numerous studies have proven us correct.

Now our three kids go to a charter school OR Catholic school because APS has been completely inept in managing COVID and balancing the learning and socialization needs of children with a virus that has minimal impacts on children and has for the past two years.

The new COVID protocols at APS, adopted (so far as I can tell) without a vote of the Board, are unfair, unnecessary, and unscientific. I urge the board to take a public vote to overturn them and I urge ALL board members to vote to do so. Furthermore, in addition to overturning the new, unnecessary protocols, I urge the NEW APS board to eliminate the unnecessary mask mandate on children in the classroom.

Albuquerque’s prior City Council (not the recently-elected group) collaborated with Mayor Keller to eliminate fares for bus riders. It is hard to say whether the new policy will result in more ridership or not, but it is clear that fewer and fewer people choose to ride the bus.

In the private sector this would result in resources being shifted away from an increasingly unpopular system. In government, failure results in more resources being wasted to provide a service that fewer people desire. Finally, the better option would be to return money wasted on “free” buses to taxpayers. 

Here is the data from the City with the percent of decrease added:

On this week’s podcast Paul and Wally begin by noting that the Foundation’s recent interview with Dr. Deane Waldman was censored by Youtube. The Foundation is currently working to find another video hosting site to host interviews and discussions.

A new report from Yahoo News via the London Telegraph indicates COVID was both man-made AND leaked from a lab and Fauci lied about it.

MLG Cancels MLK parade due to COVID, but Comicon goes on as scheduled at the ABQ Convention Center.

Local Christian (private) school, Hope Christian, fined $5,000 by NM PED for not enforcing masks on students.

Novak Djokovic story just keeps getting more bizarre: he won’t play in Australian Open and has been deported. Now a new law in France may keep him out of the French Open:

SCOTUS denies Biden’s sweeping vaccine mandate on businesses (6-3), but the court allowed a more limited mandate requiring health care workers at facilities receiving federal money to be vaccinated. The vote in the employer mandate case was 6 to 3, with the liberal justices in dissent. The vote in the health care case was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh joins the liberal justices to form a majority.

Despite far more restrictive policies New Mexico now exceeds both South Dakota AND (soon) Florida on COVID deaths per population. Here is the latest tally from World o Meters. 

Albuquerque Public Schools cancels classes due to a cyberattack. Another bad look for APS. Will APS get back to school on Tuesday? Bernalillo County ALSO suffered from a major cyber-attack recently and Santa Fe Public Schools have canceled in-person learning for the time being.

Councilor Dan Lewis proposes cutting Albuquerque GRT. That’s triple the tax cut proposed by MLG. 

Eliminate New Mexico’s Social Security tax, don’t shift the burden. Paul has put together an early list of the worst bills. These were pre-filed in the 2022 session.

NOTE: the following is posted on Rumble, a platform that respects free speech, unlike Youtube:

Today is the first FULL day of activity at the Roundhouse in Santa Fe. Having been vaccinated and with evidence to that effect, RGF president Paul Gessing headed to the Capitol for a series of meetings.

Gessing was highly surprised to find out upon attempting to enter the building that his vaccine (Johnson and Johnson administered June 1, 2021) was not acceptable for entry to the “People’s House.” He was told that an ADDITIONAL (booster) shot was required for entry.  Since Gessing had COVID over the holidays despite being vaccinated he has no intention of getting boosted as well.

After some scrambling Gessing managed to gain access to a religious exemption form to enter the building. So, if you plan to come to the Roundhouse this session and are NOT boosted, you should definitely reach out to a conservative member of the Legislature or their office in order to obtain a religious exemption form and gain entry.

Whatever your opinions on the vaccine (or masks which are also required for entry, cloth masks will do) the push for boosters is NOT based on any scientific “consensus.” As was WIDELY reported this fall, no fewer than two top scientists at the Food and Drug Administration QUIT over the Biden Administration’s push for widespread boosters. Those scientists wrote a scathing critique of Biden’s booster policy in The Lancet.  

The Rio Grande Foundation’s podcast Tipping Point New Mexico takes on some difficult and controversial issues. Unfortunately, that is simply too much for many social media companies including Youtube.

In fact, the company recently removed an interview with former UNM Hospital pediatric cardiologist Dr. Deane Waldman. You can see the note from Youtube below which goes on to say, “YouTube doesn’t allow claims about COVID-19 vaccinations that contradict expert consensus from local health authorities or the World Health Organization (WHO). Learn more here.”

The Rio Grande Foundation HAS NEVER opposed the vaccines. Rather, there appear to be some legitimate concerns about certain heart issues in young men and menstrual changes in women. It appears that Youtube/Google would like us to not be able to discuss these and other health issues.

You can watch the censored interview with Dr. Waldman below and subscribe to our new Rumble feed:

As of the day before the 2022 Legislature kicks off, here are some of the worst bills introduced in the session (so far). You can see the updated list of bills introduced in the session here as of January 17, 2022. More will be added. Given the large number of bills likely to be introduced, I’ll also offer a brief thought on how likely they are to pass:

HB 6, Reps. Nathan Small (D) Brian Egolf (D), Kristina Ortez (D), Sens. Siah Correa Hemphill (D), Mimi Stewart (D). Sets legislative framework for “net-zero” CO2 emissions in State of New Mexico. Likelihood of passage: High as Gov. MLG has said she wants to make New Mexico “net-zero.”

HB 11, Reps. Debra Sariñana (D) and Meredith Dixon (D). Creates a tax credit of up to $5,000 and 40% of the cost of “energy storage” systems. Likelihood of passage: High This yet another part of the push toward unreliable forms of electricity that will demand massive and costly battery storage.

HB 14, Reps. Christine Chandler (D) and Debra M. Sariñana (D). Allows local governments to issue Industrial Revenue Bonds (IRB) and gross receipts tax deductions for “energy storage” systems. Likelihood of passage: High (see above).

HB 33, Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D). Imposes massive (regressive) tax hike on tobacco consumers at a time of massive budget surpluses. Likelihood of passage: Moderate (it will hard for legislators to explain a tax hike at a time of record budget surpluses).

HB 34, Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D). Expands and extends an already-generous solar panel tax credit that disproportionately benefits wealthy New Mexicans. Likelihood of passage: High (furthers “green” agenda and benefits well-connected, wealthy solar customers and companies).

HB 71, Rep. Matthew McQueen (D) and Jason C. Harper (R). Allows taxes on residential property to rise by up to 10% ANNUALLY (as opposed to 3% currently). Likelihood of passage: Moderate (Property taxes are notoriously unpopular and it is hard to see the Legislature passing a big tax hike in an election year, even with a GOP co-sponsor).

HB 75, Rep. Sponsor Patricia Roybal Caballero (D). Sets up a state-run bank in New Mexico. New Mexico already has a robust network of banks and credit unions, the last thing it needs is a government-run and taxpayer-financed bank. Likelihood of passage: Moderate this is a concept likely to be seen as too far beyond the pale even for many Democrats.

HB 78 and HB 132 Rep. Patricial Roybal Caballero (D) is on HB 78 while HB 132 is more likely to pass and sponsored by Rep. Susan K. Herrera, Speaker Brian Egolf, Reps. Joy Garratt (D), Phelps Anderson (I) and Daymon Ely (D). Both bills create artificial limits on interest rates charged by certain lenders in New Mexico that will limit credit availability to those with poor or no credit. Likelihood of passage: High (HB 132) as this concept has numerous groups supporting and high-interest loans are misunderstood and by legislators, the media, and the population at large.

HB 126, Reps. Tara L. Lujan (D) and Pamelya Herndon (D), Creates all manner of “diversity” requirements for state government employees, creates a “Chief Diversity Officer” as well as “diversity” and “inclusion” liaisons in State government, requires an annual report on whether the State is achieving its diversity and inclusion goals. Is New Mexico State government not “woke” enough? This legislation is for you. Likelihood of passage: Moderate.

HJR 2 / SJR2 Reps. Joanne J. Ferrary (D), Tara L. Lujan (D), Gail Chasey (D), Sens. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, (D), Harold Pope (D). Purports to provide the people of New Mexico with vaguely-defined “environmental rights” includng the right to a “clean and healthy environment and the “right to protction of the environment.” The vague provisions contained in this amendment will simply result in more expensive lawsuits and unnecessary regulations. This is a Constitutional amendment and extremely vaguely worded which might scare away supporters.  Likelihood of passage: Moderate.

SB 8, Sens. Peter Wirth (D),   Katy M. Duhigg (D), Harold Pope (D) Carrie Hamblen (D), and  Rep. Javier Martínez (D) would “reform” voting in New Mexico by allowing 16 and 17 year olds to vote, creating a permanent absentee voter list, and permitting people without an official state ID to register to vote online by using their full Social Security number. Likelihood of passage: High

SB 21, Sen. Bill Tallman (D), Provides a tax subsidy for electric vehicles which tend to be driven by wealthy New Mexicans and is thus “regressive.” If there is one policy area where New Mexico’s Legislature loves to pour subsidies it would be for supposed “green” initiatives. Likelihood of passage: High

SB 99, Sen. Leo Jaramillo (D), Creates a new “State Transit Fund” to further funnel money from state taxpayers to failed transit projects. This is a new idea this session, but with so much money floating around there is always reason to be concerned about new wasteful spending. Likelihood of passage: Moderate

As the New Mexico Legislature’s 30-day session kicks off on Tuesday with massive budget surpluses and (likely) massive spending increases, there is at least a fighting chance for some kind of tax cuts. The Gov.  has put forth a proposal for a slight gross receipts tax cut while a few other bills have been introduced to eliminate the tax on Social Security. You can find them here and here.

Sen. Bill Tallman (D-Bernalillo County) has also introduced a bill that would eliminate the Social Security tax for. 90% of New Mexicans. We have not been able to find the pre-filed bill, BUT there is a news story about it here. Unfortunately, rather than providing a pure tax cut, the bill strives to be “revenue neutral” by adding new taxes on tobacco users.

Given New Mexico’s incredibly large budget surplus ($1.6 billion) AND the massive spending expected this session (a 13.5% increase or $1 billion), the ONLY acceptable option is to eliminate Social Security taxation (reducing revenues by a mere $85 million), not to replace one tax with other tax hikes as Tallman would do. It also happens that Tallman’s bill would be “regressive.” That is, it would cut taxes on relatively high income seniors while raising them on relatively low income smokers and other tobacco users.

New Mexico is one of just 13 states that tax Social Security. It’s time to eliminate New Mexico’s Social Security tax once and for all.

You can find the full budget here. It represents a 13.5% annual increase over the prior budget. There is not a whole lot to get excited about for anyone who cares about economic (as opposed to government) growth, but here are some interesting items:

1. She doesn’t explicitly discuss her small GRT cut in her budget. I went back and found an old Bill Richardson budget online and you can bet HE mentioned cutting taxes! With the State experiencing banner growth in the budget thanks  to the oil and gas industry (and Washington money-printing), cutting taxes SHOULD be a much higher priority.
2. In her budget,  Lujan Grisham claims, “This administration has created more jobs during the pandemic than the prior administration created in eight years – roughly 40,000.” She provides ZERO footnotes or citations for her assertion which is made on page IV of her budget. We used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and found a very different story. Using the “total civilian labor force” for the beginning/end/most recent month available (November 2021) we see that the number of jobs grew by 5.3% under Martinez while Lujan Grisham is at-1.5 percent since the start of her term.  It is hard to tell how Lujan Grisham justifies her claim aside from absolving herself from ALL jobs LOST during the pandemic and then taking credit for ALL jobs CREATED since its darkest days.
3. Lujan Grisham’s budget request includes $2.5 million to create a 15-person “Climate Change Bureau.” (page XIX). The newly-created bureaucracy would cost taxpayers more than $166,000 per employee and would give the Gov. a paid group to push her radical environmental agenda.
4. Finally, while there are many items contained in the budget to take issue with, Gov. Lujan Grisham proudly repeats one of her most disturbing lines. On page III she touts “a cradle-to-career education system for all New Mexicans.” You don’t have to be a raging libertarian to be skeptical of a government that pushes its long tentacles into the cradle.

UPDATED: 1/25/22

Several COVID-related issues at the start of this podcast. Cases are at record levels in New Mexico. More than 4,000 cases for the first time EVER. Lujan Grisham extended the universal indoor mask mandate yet again on Friday. Only WA, OR, CA, HI, IL, and NM have universal indoor mask mandates.

SCOTUS heard case on Biden COVID mandates. The ignorance of several justices, especially the Court’s liberals, was striking regarding basic COVID and even legal issues. Australia is refusing Tennis player access to the nation due to the Nation’s vaccine mandate. Novak Djokovic had COVID and an exemption, but JUST received a ruling that allowed into the country to play in the Australian Open. AOC has COVID after partying in Florida. Chicago’s teachers’ unions are refusing to teach (generating national outrage and even with the Mayor). So far the same hasn’t happened in New Mexico and schools remain open. The CDC after two years is finally going to study those hospitalized WITH COVID as opposed to because of COVID;

MLG releases her budget proposal for the upcoming session with 13.5% annual increase, Paul and Wally discuss. What will happen during the upcoming 30-day session?

Voting bill is bad news: it would extend the early voting period to the Sunday before election day, creating a permanent absentee voter list, automatically register people to vote with a transaction at the MVD, allow electronic signatures for nominating petitions, create a straight-party ballot option. It would also allow 16 and 17-year-olds to vote in local elections, like school board elections.

Conservative legislative group ALEC ranks MLG “worst governor in the nation.” 

As expected, US greenhouse emissions rose in Biden’s first year.

Emissions rose by about 6.2 percent in 2021 over 2020. Still, emissions remained about 5 percent below 2019 levels;

A lawsuit filed by former CFO over alleged fraud totaling $200 million. Allegations are made against: 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.” 

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.