Check out this opinion piece from Democratic Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth. It is the height of economic ignorance as it depends corporate income taxes on the grounds that they take on “out of state corporations.” (His piece is a response to this from Tom Clifford and Richard Anklam)

While opinions can differ regarding which taxes to cut in New Mexico, Wirth doesn’t focus on ANY tax cuts. He simply asserts that keeping the job-killing corporate income tax (which raises just $325 million annually) in place makes economic sense. New Mexico has had massive budget surpluses (thanks to oil and gas) in recent years, but has done nearly nothing to reform/improve its tax structure.  This leaves New Mexico as the poorest state in the nation while the State has grown MORE dependent on the left’s hated oil and gas industry.

As the Cato Institute notes:

Economists Christina and David Romer (who once served in the Obama Administration) found that a $1 tax increase in the United States has historically decreased GDP by about $3. Entin notes that widely accepted estimates of labor’s share of output imply that labor pays about $2 of the total economic cost or 200 percent of the $1 tax increase. Corporate income taxes are even more economically damaging than the average result from Romer and Romer, which lumps many types of tax increases together.

Would reducing or eliminating New Mexico’s corporate income tax be the BEST tax reform for the Legislature to enact right now? Economists believe it would do a lot of good at a low cost to the treasury. But so would reform of the GRT. So would cutting or even eliminating New Mexico’s personal income tax.  Sadly, Wirth is emblematic of a Legislature that prioritizes attacking businesses and productive taxpayers, not growing the economic pie and diversifying New Mexico’s economy.

The Tax Foundation notes that “Many economists, including those at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), agree that the corporate income tax is one of the most harmful and least efficient ways to fund our priorities.” Check out their brief explainer video below:

New Mexico Gov. Lujan Grisham isn’t giving up on her EV agenda in the wake of Trump’s presidential win (and the likelihood that Trump will abandon the left’s push for EV’s). EV sales in New Mexico currently account for less than 5% of overall vehicle sales, but they are MLG’s top priority regardless. That clearly shows in the agenda for her recent “Symposium on the Future of Transportation in New Mexico”

The first three panels were as follows: Grid Modernization & Resilience, Charging Network & EV Infrastructure, Electrification of Transportation Fleets.

Other panels included a useful panel on procurement and then two which claim to address various aspects of “climate change.”

What about New Mexico’s deteriorating roads and infrastructure? Should New Mexico be taxing EV’s a a means of generating revenue for road maintenance? What about the costly and carbon spewing Rail Runner and its future? What about the existing technologies like the internal combustion engine and how it is continuously being improved to be cleaner?  What about hydrogen vehicles and other non-electric cars?

Nope. Nothing on any of that. Just more obsession with EV’s and “climate change.” Next time you drive over a pot hole or are stuck in traffic, blame MLG.

The following short video of Chris Wright Trump’s nominee for Energy Secretary is a great synopsis of the way the Trump Administration sees energy policy and the case for energy freedom and prosperity. The Agency which Wright will lead has a massive impact in New Mexico with our two national labs (Sandia and Los Alamos) under its jurisdiction.

Here’s to the pro-energy shift in Washington.

WOW: Chris Wright, President Trump’s nominee for Energy Secretary, dispels the “climate change” propaganda with straightforward facts and common sense.

Restoring American energy dominance is a key to prosperity for *all* of us.pic.twitter.com/Owk0JzBRyT

— John Strand (@JohnStrandUSA) November 18, 2024

For over a decade New Mexico has received a waiver from the federal government that has allowed able-bodied adults without children to continue receiving food stamps (SNAP benefits) whether they worked or not. Due to falling unemployment rates in some areas, residents of Bernalillo, Santa Fe, Eddy and Los Alamos counties along with San Ildefonso, Pojoaque, Santa Clara and Laguna pueblos will no longer be exempted from the requirement that people who are 18 and 54 years old, single and don’t have dependents now have to prove they’re working at least 80 hours a month to keep getting SNAP benefits.

Getting people to enter the work force when they are of prime working age and don’t have kids and are living in an area of the state that has low unemployment is as minimal a requirement as one can imagine for the 11,939 who fit into the categories outlined above. Nonetheless, left-wing activist are opposed to even this work requirement.

As the Rio Grande Foundation and LFC have noted, New Mexico has a poor workforce participation rate. Getting New Mexicans to work would go a long way to solving many of our State’s most serious problems. It is simply outrageous that able-bodied working age adults without children are not expected to work a mere 80 hours a month to receive SNAP benefits (regardless of where they live).

President elect Trump is often portrayed by his Democratic opponents as being a downright Hitlerian figure. Among other things Hitler was known to be quite vindictive towards his enemies. In his first term Trump was hardly vindictive at all, most notably in his behavior towards Hillary Clinton. Will that change in his 2nd term?

Trump owes “deep blue” New Mexico nothing. We have no Republicans in any position of significant power for him to be concerned about.  And, when Trump came to town for a rally, our Gov., Land Commissioner, and Mayor of our largest city (Keller) all conspired in an attempt to prevent the speech from happening (at least smoothly).

If Trump DOES decide to punish his enemies, New Mexico could be in trouble. The State is consistently ranked among the most dependent on federal spending. It is also the only state (California is sort of an exception) with national nuclear labs. Dozens of sanctuary cities are found throughout New Mexico. Trump has already stated that he’ll take on these cities. Could he withhold federal funds in some way?

Trump seems much more serious about restraining spending than he was in his first term. He could specifically target New Mexico while ALSO reducing government spending. Will he?

On this week’s interview Paul sits down with Daniel Turner the Founder and Executive Director of Power the Future, a pro-energy activism organization that works nationally and in New Mexico. Paul and Daniel discuss the role energy issues played in the 2024 election and why New Mexico failed to embrace pro-energy, reform-minded candidates. Also they discuss what Trump will do on energy issues in the near future and over his four years in office as well as where things are headed in New Mexico.

Don’t miss this thoughtful, forward-looking conversation!

New Mexico has not implemented, but HAS adopted (as of the 2024 legislative session) a California-style “clean fuel standard.” A RGF analysis found that (contrary to statements by the MLG Administration) the fuel standard will dramatically increase gas prices paid by New Mexicans.

Well, California just revised its “clean fuel standard” to make it more stringent in terms of its CO2 reduction benefits and, guess what? According to a report by Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, the State’s gas prices are expected to increase by 65-cent per gallon under the revised standards. Furthermore, the report notes that “If LCFS credit prices reach their maximum allowed levels, as has occurred in the past, then retail gasoline price impacts could be $0.65 per gallon in the near term, $0.85 per gallon by 2030, and nearly $1.50 per gallon by 2035.”

The GOOD news for New Mexicans is that even the initial round of cost increases has not occurred yet. We haven’t heard plans (yet) to follow California in further increasing our standard and therefore our gas prices. This DID Happen with New Mexico’s EV mandates which ALSO follow California as that state further increased its EV mandate so did New Mexico. This is one to keep an eye on.

On this week’s conversation Paul and Wally discuss the election results. Specifically each of them made predictions about the election and potential outcomes. How did they do?

Ultimately this conversation wraps up the election outcomes and looks forward to some big issues and races looming in the months and years ahead for the United States and New Mexico alike.

While New Mexico’s Democrats mourn the results of the 2024 elections nationally, we at the Rio Grande Foundation are frustrated that a majority of New Mexicans seem to have doubled-down on the State’s poor performance economically, educationally, not to mention crime and the loss of numerous young people to other states.

When voters continue to send far left legislators and governors to Santa Fe (especially when oil and gas money is flowing freely) it is going to be difficult to stop the myriad bad ideas that are pushed regularly in the Legislature. That said, with all of the oil and gas money available, even our leftist Legislature MAY decide to offer a bit of relief to taxpayers. We don’t expect gross receipts tax reform. We don’t expect big tax tax cuts (and we do expect tax cuts to be paired with tax hikes). So, here’s what we’ll be working on this session:

1. Maximizing the benefit and size of tax cuts while minimizing/eliminating tax hikes;
2. We want to lock in gross receipts tax elimination for medical providers (the current exemption sunsets in 2028) and further improve New Mexico as a destination for medical professionals.
3. Stopping economically-harmful paid family and medical leave. There are ways to make this economically-benign, but not the bill pushed in the 2024 session (or prior years);
4. Baby bonds are not the worst idea, but they need work. We plan to engage on this issue and raise concerns if the idea goes “off the rails.”
5. Oil and gas setbacks are a terrible idea lacking in scientific backing. If adopted the LFC says they’d cost New Mexico $800 million annually for years to come.
6. It looks like criminal justice and crime fighting will be discussed (perhaps not in ways that will be effective). We plan to engage in that debate in support of ideas that will positively impact crime issues;
7.  Any effort to reduce regulatory burdens will help New Mexico’s economy. One bipartisan idea is known as “regulatory sandboxes.” This idea was introduced by Democrats in 2023. We hope such an idea will gain traction in the 2025 session.

On this week’s interview Paul talks to Jared Walczak of the Tax Foundation. The Tax Foundation is a prominent center/right taxpayer research organization based in Washington, DC. They often testify in New Mexico’s Legislature on issues relating to taxation. They also have a new State Tax Competitiveness Index. New Mexico ranks 31st which isn’t at the bottom, but isn’t great either. Paul and Jared discuss the Index, its findings and implications for tax policy, which states perform well and poorly and why, and what New Mexico policymakers should do to make New Mexico more competitive with other states.

You don’t want to miss this fascinating conversation!

Shocking RGF and many others, New Mexico largely stayed the same politically after the November election. Republicans (seem to) have picked up one house and one senate seat each, but given overwhelming numbers in Santa Fe that won’t affect Democrats much. Trump gained in overall vote totals while winning both the popular vote and the election, but lost New Mexico. Yvette Herrell lost by thousands more votes than she did in 2022 and the other races for Congress weren’t competitive.

All bonds passed, judges were retained, and Las Cruces voters even adopted a gross receipts tax hike. Judging by these results, New Mexicans aren’t just happy with the Democratic Party’s dominance, but are happy with its dramatic moves to the political left in recent years (including this one).

So, MLG will serve out her next to years in office as a “lame duck.” Paid Family Leave will undoubtedly be on the agenda and stopping it will be even more difficult than before. A modest tax cut will be on the table (possibly to the GRT), but other tax hikes will likely be considered as will more gun control. The State budget will likely remain flush (unless planned Trump’s massive oil and gas production increases have a massive, negative impact on prices).

It will be a tough two years at the Roundhouse, but MLG has already enacted most of her agenda thanks to a friendly Legislature. What will she do next? Will she actually continue to push anti-crime legislation (much to the chagrin of her party)? Only time will tell.

Will ANYTHING move New Mexico to the right? Democrats seem to be moving towards Deb Haaland as the next candidate for Gov. Will the Republicans have a credible candidate to oppose her in two years?

The following appeared in the Santa Fe New Mexican on Saturday, November 2nd, 2024.

The City of Española, at the behest of Mayor John Ramon Vigil, will soon consider adopting a ban on plastic bags like those used at grocery stores. While proponents of such bans typically support them on environmental grounds (cut down on plastic waste etc.) the Mayor seems to believe that banning plastic grocery bags will have a positive impact on the City’s litter problems.

According to the website Plastics Paradox, “A compilation of all of the statistically-based, scientific studies of litter in the U.S. and Canada over an 18 year period shows consistently that “plastic bags” (which includes trash bags, grocery bags, retail bags and dry cleaning bags) make up a very small portion of litter, usually less than 1%.” Banning plastic grocery bags will not impact litter issues in Española.

The first step toward solving the litter problem is educating the public on the harms of littering. While you may or may not like the new “Breaking Bad” themed litter campaign put forth by the Gov., it is the first major public initiative on litter in years. It is a step in the right direction.

But educating the public will only get you so far. The Mayor is correct that the so-called “homeless” who often occupy road medians and other public spaces are some of the biggest culprits. Enforcing laws against both littering and the occupation of public parks and rights-of-way would help with the litter problem. Enforcing litter laws would help as well.

Improving the litter situation is not just about appearance, there is abundant literature in the “Broken Windows Theory” of policing and public safety indicating that addressing “minor” issues like litter can ALSO have an impact in the form of reducing other crimes.

We share the Mayor’s goal of reducing litter and beautifying Española, but we’d prefer to focus on the root problems rather than arbitrarily banning a simple and useful item like plastic bags.

Besides, while it is not the stated reason for the Mayor’s plastic bag ban, reducing plastic waste is another worthwhile goal. Sometimes plastic bag bans have been used in hopes of achieving reductions in plastic waste. But, in at least two cases, those bans have had the opposite impact of increasing plastic waste.

In one case New Jersey passed a law in 2020 banning single-use plastic and paper bags in all stores and food service businesses. The law took effect in May 2022

But, as a study by Freedonia Research found that while the total number of plastic bags did go down by more than 60 percent to 894 million bags, the alternative bags ended up having a much larger carbon footprint with the state’s consumption of plastic for bags spiking by a factor of nearly three. Plastic consumption went from 53 million pounds of plastic before the ban to 151 million pounds following the ban.

New Jersey is not alone in having a plastic bag ban backfire with the result being more plastic waste, not less.

A similar thing happened in California. The Los Angeles Times editorial board recently highlighted the failure of California’s plastic bag ban. Not surprising is the fact that California banned single-use plastic grocery bags back in 2016, becoming the first state to adopt such a law.

But, as the Times noted in its editorial, “In 2014 California tossed about 157,385 tons of plastic bag waste into the trash. In 2022, plastic bags accounted for about 231,072 tons of trash. That’s nearly 50% more.”

Good public policy isn’t just about passing policies that feel good. Hopefully Española’s City Council will do some research for themselves and reject this harmful bag ban.

Sam LeDoux is an Española City Councilor representing District 4. Paul Gessing is president of New Mexico’s Rio Grande Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization

Organizing them as best as possible here are a few thoughts relating to the outcome of the 2024 election:

Trump the moderate: on issue after issue Trump staked out positions on the issues that reflected the views of the largest number of Americans. It is good to see that issues still matter and drive election results;

Abortion, one of many issues: Since the leak of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade Democrats have made abortion rights the centerpiece of nearly every campaign. While abortion is a hot-button issue so are the economy, education, crime, foreign policy, free speech, energy, and numerous other policy issues;

Kamala Harris, knowledge and details matter: Kamala Harris and Donald Trump both were vague about the policies they planed to implement if elected. The difference is that Trump had already served four years in the White House and Americans generally thought positively about his time in office (with the obvious exception of COVID). They seem to be hoping that Trump’s next four years closely resemble his first four when it comes to policy.

New Mexico the outlier: It is hard to believe that New Mexico was a “swing” state in 2004 and that we had a Republican Governor as recently as 2018. While Republicans have not performed well here since Trump entered the political scene in 2016, even a pro-Trump “landslide” was not enough for the Party to make inroads in 2024. The near-term future for New Mexico’s GOP looks even bleaker than it has in recent years which hasn’t been great. They need to find a solid candidate to run for Gov. in two years and to start building for that;

A loss for media and Hollywood elites: Like never before in recent history the entire establishment took aim at one person. They called him a Nazi and every other name in the book. The influence of the media on Americans has never been lower and the power of alternative news sources (like podcasts and Twitter) has never been higher. Check out OUR podcast Tipping Point NM here and follow us on “X” here. 

Trump the history maker: While EVERY election is “historic” in some way, Trump becomes the first president since Grover Cleveland to win, lose, and then win again. Cleveland is not regarded highly by historians, but advocates of limited government believe he is one of the great presidents in American history.

Meanwhile, for a shocking visual, check out the map of seats in the US House of Representatives. New Mexico really stands out and is in fact the only geographically large and identifiable “blue” state in the nation.

The 2024 election was extremely good for Republicans and those concerned about the way our country had been managed over the last four years. With Trump appearing to win more than 300 electoral votes (and the popular vote) and the GOP picking up a number of Senate seats, New Mexico would be poised to see some big moves away from its status as a deep blue outpost in the American Southwest.

It was not to be. New Mexico went for Harris, Martin Heinrich and Gabe Vasquez retained their seats comfortably, and even the Legislature was largely unchanged in its partisan makeup. The fact that the Legislature (despite all 112 seats being up) did not shift on Election Day means that it has shifted even further to the left thanks to results from Democrat primaries back in June.

What does this all mean? MLG is staying put in New Mexico to finish out her term (no appointment in the Harris Administration);

Martin Heinrich (who won his Senate seat) is widely rumored to be planning a run for Gov. in two years.

More importantly, New Mexico moves further down the path to California-style deep “blue” status that will elect Democrats regardless of what happens nationwide. Mandatory paid leave, gun control, and all manner of far-left economic policies will likely be in the offing as the Gov. and Legislature likely agree to end their fight over crime and instead focus on growing government and handing subsidies out to their political friends.

With New Mexico having a once-in-history economic opportunity thanks to a booming oil and gas industry, a failing education system, high crime, and deteriorating infrastructure, former territorial governor of New Mexico Lew Wallace’s famous quote about New Mexico rings truer than ever.

If it weren’t so funny it would just be sad. Some status quo judicial advocates wrote an opinion piece in the Albuquerque Journal recently argued that the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission recently advocated for keeping ALL 35 judges evaluated. The opinion piece actually takes the Journal to task for arguing “discernment” in picking judges to retain (or not). You can read their editorial and recommendations here. 

But their arguments are dubious at best. One statement particularly caught our attention: “The Journal disregards sociological research and abundant other evidence that totally undermines the faulty premise that criminal court judges’ decisions have any meaningful impact on whether people commit crimes.”

Nobody has ever said that judges cause crime, but what is left unsaid is how judicial decisions can impact crime by either keeping crooks behind bars or letting them back on the streets. We had our own views on ONE judge (Cindy Leos). While we cited the JPEC in our analysis, they actually recommended retention despite numerous issues.

The opinion piece blindly supporting JPEC concludes with the following: “Asking (the Journal’s) readers to disregard the work of JPEC and substitute its own bias and unqualified opinion is irresponsible.” If voters’ opinions are to be ignored then why are they being asked to vote on judges in the first place? Do judges REALLY not have an impact on crime? How about reforming our judicial election system to allow judges to run for office the same way as other candidates for public office?

On this week’s interview Paul interviews former New Mexico Senator, demographer, and election official, Rod Adair. They discuss the role of demography in redistricting, the redistricting process itself, and whether New Mexico’s Congressional and legislative districts are “fair.” Then Paul and Rod moved on to discussing the 2024 election including the Secretary of State’s recent mailing that generated controversy, how to better secure New Mexico elections, and whether the election results themselves will be “fair.” With Election Day looming you don’t want to miss this important conversation!

From a variety of polling data and plenty of public statements made by Republicans and Democrats alike about crime and the economy (not to mention New Mexico’s worst-in-the-nation education results despite massive funding increases), this SHOULD be a “change” election for New Mexico.

The Albuquerque Journal recently issued a scathing editorial highlighting the myriad failures of New Mexico’s Democratic Party establishment on the crime issue. We couldn’t agree more, the status quo is untenable in New Mexico. BUT, crime is only ONE issue that policymakers have abjectly failed to address.

What about New Mexico’s economy which remains entirely dependent on the very oil and gas industry loathed by its “progressive” legislative majority? Yet, even with this boom we trail our neighbors badly.

And of course New Mexico’s education system remains dead-last and shows no signs of improving.

So, the Albuquerque Journal is spot-on, but we only wish they’d have gone a bit further in highlighting why “more of the same” is untenable in the Land of Enchantment.

The Tax Foundation is a center/right tax research and advocacy organization. For a broadly free market organization they and their information are actually able to get a respectable hearing in New Mexico’s Legislature. Sadly, the Tax Foundation’s views don’t necessarily result in public policy changes, but it is good to be invited to share your views.

Tax Foundation has a new “State Tax Competitiveness” report and sadly, but not surprisingly, New Mexico’s performance leaves a lot to be desired at 31st overall. While 31st is not entirely awful, it is worse than most of neighbors. More importantly, New Mexico’s oil and gas boom has generated enough revenue to allow the Legislature and Gov. to address our tax code issues.

Sadly, that has not happened in any substantive way. Yes, New Mexico COULD be worse than 31st, but with the self-inflicted crime and education issues impacting the willingness of businesses and people to relocate (or stay in) New Mexico, we need our political leadership to do better.

You can see (and click on) New Mexico’s tax competitiveness page below:

Trump is coming to New Mexico. What are the details and what does it mean for the election and New Mexico?

Paul voted this week. No lines but it was busy. We’re in the 2nd week of early voting. You can vote through Saturday.

The ABQ Journal comes out hard for change in New Mexico. This is welcome, but Paul wishes they’d say the same thing about the economy and education.

Mandating setbacks for oil and gas development would cost New Mexico big $$$ according to a new report by the Legislative Finance Committee.

The National Association of Manufacturers has a new report touting the economic impact of LNG exports and highlighting problems with the Biden/Harris pause.

O’Neill’s owner says ART and COVID cost him his business.

Think New Mexico produces plan to (further) address the State’s medical provider shortage.

Finally, Paul and Wally offer some predictions for the election including who wins the presidency, US Senate races, and other critical races.

RGF has commented in the recent past about the steep decline in the number of students at the State’s largest school district (Albuquerque Public Schools). But, APS is by no means the only school district in New Mexico that has seen a steep decline in its student population. Santa Fe’s public schools have as well as a recent article in the Santa Fe New Mexican highlighted. We put the data in a handy chart (below) and made a quick calculation to find that the District has seen a 25% drop in student population since 2013.

The decline in student numbers is not unique to New Mexico, but with New Mexico having a stagnant population overall and a rapidly-aging one, don’t look for this trend to change anytime soon. Of course COVID and the Gov.’s lockdowns, poor performance of New Mexico schools, and a growing home school movement have all contributed to the declining student population in government schools.

A focus on school choice would help. Growing New Mexico’s economy and thus our State’s population would also. But, these are anathema to New Mexico’s left-wing legislative majorities and Gov. Lujan Grisham. So, unless things change New Mexico’s well-funded but failing government schools will continue to see a steep drop in student numbers.

In a State with $6 billion in unspent capital outlay money and (according to one study) the worst roads in the nation, one might think that the relevant legislative committees would be focused like a laser on addressing our State’s myriad road issues and figuring out a way to get unused capital outlay $$ allocated to much-needed projects across our State. Sadly, that’s not what is happening at the Transportation Infrastructure Revenue Subcommitee in the Legislature.

Instead, the agenda included a presentation about high speed rail (the LFC just reported that the Rail Runner which hardly qualifies as “high speed” is actually BAD for the environment). Of course, the train is also a HUGE waste of our tax dollars. And even in Albuquerque, the bus system’s ridership remains BELOW pre-pandemic levels despite the buses no longer charging fares. Nationally, transit ridership remains well below pre-pandemic levels and shows no sign of returning to those levels.

But even high speed rail may not be the worst idea discussed at the Subcommittee’s recent meeting. They had an honest-to-goodness discussion about putting an elevated rail system totaling 70 stations, 7 lines, and 103 miles of ELEVATED rail throughout Albuquerque. You can read more details including remarkably detailed presentations here. You can check out the graphic below.

Where would the money come from? The report cites the Land Grant Permanent Fund and Public Employee Retirement Association (PERA) as likely sources.

Thankfully, this is unlikely to happen even in New Mexico’s “progressive” Legislature, but it is a clear indicator that reconsidering the expensive and polluting Rail Runner is not “on the table.” Instead they are talking about a new elevated train for Albuquerque.

New Mexico’s medical provider shortage remains a critical issue. While many changes were undertaken during the 2023 legislative session to address the shortage of medical providers, the fact is that New Mexico continues to suffer from a relative lack of medical providers. To be sure, New Mexico is NOT alone in this matter. For a variety of reasons there is a national shortage. And, to be clear the Rio Grande Foundation has spent considerable time on the topic with an analysis of the shortage here and our own report on some solutions (including a handful that were enacted in 2023) here.

Think New Mexico’s report is a useful addition to the conversation about how to further build on 2023’s important reforms (and make sure those gains are locked in). Ideas include:

• Further reforms to New Mexico’s medical malpractice law;
• Join All Ten Major Interstate Health Care Worker Compacts;
• Create a Centralized Credentialing System;
• Make New Mexico’s Tax Policy More Friendly to Health Care Workers (this includes making the gross receipts tax exemption for medical providers permanent, a policy RGF has long-supported);
• Enhance Medicaid Reimbursement & Reduce Claim Denial Rates;
• Increase the number of medical professionals through internal development as well as bringing them in from abroad;
• Create a “permanent fund” for health care.

Overall, RGF supports an overwhelming majority of this report. We have written about and argued for several of these ideas in our own papers which are linked in this post. Our critiques are as follows:

Medical licensing should be limited and often eliminated entirely. Compacts and centralized credentialing are 2nd-best options.

Medicaid should be reduced as a force in New Mexico’s health care system by encouraging people to work and by making the system less generous relative to other health care options. That said, increasing reimbursements to medical professionals will have a positive impact on medical providers.

We DO NOT like the idea of a permanent fund for health care and have a very different view of existing permanent funds from that outlined in this report.

Overall, there is a lot of good information in this report.

The Rio Grande Foundation has long touted the economic and environmental benefits of American exports of liquefied natural gas (LNG). We share that perspective with the National Association of Manufacturers which recently came out with a study highlighting the benefits of exporting LNG and the drawbacks of the Biden/Harris Administration’s current “pause” on LNG export permits.

As the graphic below highlights, Americans (including of course New Mexicans) are benefiting from LNG exports via good paying jobs, economic growth, and increased taxes paid. If the Biden/Harris policy of limiting LNG exports is not addressed all of that will be negatively and dramatically impacted.