The Gov. has declared a special session of the Legislature which will kick off on September 18. There are many reasons to complain about this on both sides of the aisle (too many complicated issues and no agreement on them and taking precious time out of the campaign calendar). Republicans and Democrats have both complained.

But, it is so-called “progressives” and their special interest groups who are most adamantly opposed to a special session. They a “who’s who” of those philosophically opposed to addressing crime because they are typical “soft on crime” liberals. For too long the Gov. and Democrats in the Legislature have ignored Albuquerque’s (and our State’s) serious crime issues in favor of policies that allow and encourage crime. It’s not JUST the Legislature and Gov. Judges need to be called out and electorally targeted and Mayor Keller and his policies along with the DOJ need to be addressed as well.

So, what’s my advice to the GOP which doesn’t have much in the way of real power unless the Gov. is willing to really put the heat on the Democrat-controlled Legislature (this may be happening)? Simple:

1) Stop the bellyaching (at least in public) about having a special session.

2) State clearly that where there is common ground on the issues, the GOP is willing to work with the Gov. (where there is not, make the case why).

3) IF “progressive” Democrats in the Legislature refuse to act, make sure to call them on it as we head into November.

Darren White, former Bernalillo County sheriff, agrees that lawmakers should get tougher on felons committing gun crimes, telling @KOAT it “could go a long way to getting the worst of the worst off of our streets.”

This Can’t Wait. Tell lawmakers to act.https://t.co/Nr895tS9S7

— Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham (@GovMLG) July 3, 2024

One of the great joys (and frustrations) of running the Rio Grande Foundation is laughing at environmental advocates who make audacious (and very non-specific) claims about “transitioning” from oil and gas to some other basis for New Mexico’s economy (not to mention the world’s energy demands).

The latest contestant in this game is Thomas Singer of the Western Environmental Law Center writing in the Albuquerque Journal. Singer (with degrees from Harvard, Stanford, and George Washington) accurately notes that New Mexico is poorly run (he fails to mention that it has been “progressive” Democrats for decades) and too reliant on oil and gas, but his path to wean New Mexico off of oil and gas is laughable.

His “solutions include” some unspecified recommendations of the “Sustainable Economy Task Force.”

Using state funds to leverage Inflation Reduction Act funds.

“Diversify and strengthen our state’s revenue base away from its current dependence on volatile, boom-and-bust oil and gas” with zero specifics.

Eliminating supposed tax subsidies to oil and gas (again, undefined and there are real questions as to what actual “subsidies” are given to oil and gas.

The problem for these leftists is that REAL solutions to diversifying New Mexico’s economy are politically-unpalatable to the political left which is populated by so-called environmentalists like Singer. New Mexico COULD use its oil and gas wealth (including massive permanent funds) to reduce taxes and bring new businesses to the State, embrace educational choice to improve our lagging workforce, and embrace “right to work” and other necessary, pro-free market labor reforms.

Sadly, the only thing more unrealistic than the so-called “energy transition” is the willingness of New Mexico’s left to reduce their control over New Mexico’s economy.

As we’ve said from its inception back in 2019, the Energy Transition Act is going to reduce reliability and increase electricity prices. According to news reports PNM has requested rate increases totaling 23% from 2025 to 2026. According to the ABQ Journal article, “many of the costs associated with PNM’s new proposal are focused on infrastructure needed for a state-required renewable energy transition.”

This is hardly a surprise. The Energy Transition Act’s demand for ever-increasing amounts of “renewable” electricity are unrealistic and simply won’t happen despite reassurances to the contrary.

A recent report from Wallethub ranked New Mexico as having the 2nd-least expensive electricity bills in the nation. But, that is a function of our favorable climate, not low electricity prices. New Mexico’s per-KWh electricity prices are neither among the 10 cheapest nor are they among the 10 most expensive.  New Mexico is by no means the ONLY state to have embraced anti-energy policies. California is among the states with the highest electricity prices (thanks to their “green” energy policies). Just give New Mexico time.

Dale Dekker is unquestionably a pillar of our community. He is actively involved in numerous aspects of public policy and attempting to boost New Mexico and the local economy. His recent opinion piece in the Albuquerque Journal asks a lot of questions about which direction New Mexico will go.

Sadly, New Mexico is NOT in need of more planning on the part of chambers of commerce or politicians. We simply need to “do the thing.” That thing is to make New Mexico an attractive destination for jobs, capital, and economic activity. Politicians have done a lousy job (not just here in New Mexico, but nationally) of picking winners and losers. But, the Spaceport, Maxeon Solar (whose stock has tanked as their business model has been questioned), and numerous other government-driven economic development schemes have failed and will continue to fail.

Dekker and others who seriously want economic development need to realize that the current political leadership of New Mexico cares about maintaining power, not improving our State. If New Mexicans want a better education system, better economy, and less crime they have to vote differently.

With the weakness of Joe Biden in recent poll numbers and ALL of New Mexico’s 112 legislative seats up for election, November’s election will truly determine whether New Mexico follows the status quo or develops an abundance and prosperity mindset.

Calling the policy “without reason or logic,” a judge has overturned the Biden Administration’s “pause” on permits for liquefied natural gas. The decision comes just in time to force the Biden Administration’s hand on what could be the nation’s largest export terminal for liquefied natural gas which recently won approval from the Federal Energy Regulatory Administration. 

RGF has recently called Biden’s ban “absurd” so it sounds like the federal judge was of the same mindset. We don’t know exactly what the next move will be for the Biden Administration since he’s not exactly known for following the rule of law, but this is a good move by the judge and will help the US economy, reduce CO2 emissions and will help our allies wean themselves off of Russian oil.

There’s no question that President Trump absolutely obliterated Joe Biden in their recent debate. Considering the failed nature of Biden’s presidency there were many opportunities for Trump to attack Biden’s record on a whole host of issues. But, Trump was arguably the very best president in American history (certainly relative to his modern peers) on energy issues. It would have been nice to see Trump “flex” some very big

1. policy differences between him and the current President. Biden’s Liquefied Natural Gas bans. Had he to do it over again, I’d have loved for Trump to turn the “climate crisis” question asked by the moderators back on Biden by touting liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports and how Biden is actually hurting climate change efforts by limiting exports. Biden will have another opportunity to act (either in favor or against LNG) again soon.
2. Trump ALSO missed an opportunity to point out how Biden’s EV mandates are unpopular, unworkable, expensive, and not all that great for the environment. 

The US Supreme Court spends much of June handing down decisions. Overall the Court with its 6-3 majority reflecting “conservative” judicial principals did pretty well and some of the Court’s biggest decisions could have profound, positive impacts on American society and the rule of law (not to mention the economy).

Unfortunately, the first decision to consider, Murthy v. Missouri is probably their worst decision. The Court did not decide on the merits of the case, but on a 6-3 basis said the plaintiffs lacked “standing.” I don’t know if anyone who HAS standing can get a similar case to the Court, but this decision will allow the US government to continue bullying and cajoling social media companies to limit or eliminate speech the government doesn’t like. It is hard to see how this doesn’t violate the 1st amendment, but the Court seemed to struggle with where to draw the line in limiting government contact with social media companies.

The Court overturned Johnson v. Grants Pass. The original decision had declared that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s “cruel and unusual punishment” clause to arrest people for sleeping on public property (like parks and sidewalks), unless the government had sufficient space in its own homeless shelters to house them. There is no right to housing in the US Constitution and this seems like an easy one, but it was “only” a 6-3 decision in favor of sanity.

The Keller Administration in Albuquerque has cited the overturned decision as a reason it cannot enforce laws against the “homeless” camping in public spaces. Hopefully this moves them and other cities toward enforcement.

The most important case of all may just be Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce which essentially overturns so-called Chevron Deference. Chevron Deference meant that regulatory agencies (part of the executive branch) could essentially write laws on their own by broadly interpreting laws passed by Congress in ways that apply to issues that were never even considered by Congress when the laws passed.

Congress will no longer be able to dump the majority of “legislating” on federal agencies, but will instead have to pass detailed and clear regulations. Of course many in Congress would prefer to avoid having to take that responsibility.

The following was a write up by RGF Policy Analyst Gabriel Higbie relating to the NM Environment Department’s Clean Transportation Fuel Standard Advisory Group. He is attending these weekly meetings and providing details on this site. Here are his comments on the first meeting.

June 21^st marked the first Advisory Committee Meeting discussing the regulations that will accompany the implementation of House Bill 41, a Clean Transportation Fuel Act passed by legislation on March 5^th, 2024. The bill makes New Mexico the fourth state to pass a Clean Fuel Act after California, Oregon, and Washington, and calls for the Environmental Department to create a program that achieves significant carbon emissions reduction in New Mexico. The Committee established two benchmarks for the program: a 20% CO2 reduction in comparison to 2018 levels by 2030, and an unstated, further reduction by 2040. Following the Advisory Committee Meetings, the Environmental Improvement Board will conduct public and tribal engagement, giving the people of NM an important opportunity to voice their opinions on the subject.

Efforts by the Environmental Department are being led by Claudia Borchert, a climate change policy coordinator, while the Committee itself is comprised of 30 members with experience in clean fuel, environmental policy, and oil and gas who will assist in rule development.

After the rule making process, the EIB will host a hearing and finalize a decision, with the hopes of implementing the Clean Fuel program by Spring of 2025. The team’s economist, Michael Ford, spoke briefly about incentivizing the use of biofuels with a credit system based on California’s energy credit model, which would “reward” citizens for making the transition to clean energy and save them money on their energy bills.

Taos Ski Valley, represented by Matthew Weyer, presented their plan to reduce carbon emissions and preserve the environment, but admitted that the technology to do so was limited, and purchasing biofuels was costly and inefficient for the company. The resort proposed using RD-99 as a replacement fuel for their machines, but due to its ineffectiveness in cold weather and high price – $8.50 per gallon – their goal of significantly reducing CO2 emissions seems to be hindered by the lack of technology available.

Towards the end of the meeting, it became evident that the 2018 carbon emission levels had not even been clearly defined, meaning that there will be no clear starting point or way of measuring progress. The lack of simple information necessary for success already hints that the program might be ill-equipped to make a positive difference.

It is important to remember the importance of Oil and Gas in New Mexico, and despite the NM government’s distaste for the industry it continues to play a vital role in our economy. The regulations imposed by House Bill 41 will likely have a vast impact on the Oil and Gas industry, and we encourage the committee to consider New Mexico’s economic prosperity in addition to reducing carbon emissions.

On this week’s Tipping Point conversation Paul sits down with former Congresswoman and current candidate for Congress Yvette Herrell. We discuss the fires that recently burned in Ruidoso and her work to reform federal lands policies. We also discuss the economy and various issues from free trade to inflation. Don’t miss this important conversation!

Democrats all over New Mexico are BIG MAD that City Council has voted to allow voters to decide whether to end expensive runoff elections in City elections. As a quick refresher Republican RJ Berry won the Mayor’s race in 2009 with 44% of the vote. He won in part because two Democrats split the vote. As soon as they had their chance, Democrats got a ballot measure passed by voters in 2013 to create a system of runoff elections to determine the ultimate winner in a two-way race.

On a 6-3 vote City Council just voted to put a measure on the ballot to allow voters to choose to go back to the prior system. The Mayor will veto that, but if all 6 remain committed to the idea, it will be voted on. From the way Democrats (and not just those in City government) are acting, it would seem that Donald Trump had been installed as Supreme Leader of Albuquerque for life.

State Sen. Bill Tallman decried the idea as a “power grab.” Of course, Tallman has been silent on MLG’s numerous actual power grabs (as have other Democrats) including: her abuse of emergency powers during COVID, her use of an unelected body to force us to drive electric vehicles, her plan to force school districts to adopt 5-day school weeks (despite bipartisan legislative opposition), and her attempt to nullify the 2nd Amendment in Bernalillo County.

In reality, Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver recently gave away the game for Albuquerque Democrats. They don’t want voters to be vote in November on shifting election requirements UNTIL THEY have the votes to push for convoluted and non-transparent “ranked choice” voting.

As I wrote in an op-ed recently, runoff elections are expensive and usually wind up with far fewer voters participating to the point that (even with fewer candidates in the race) the winner gets fewer votes in a runoff than they did in a four-way race. The left wants to keep its power. Anything else is a “power grab” to them.

In advance of July 4th Independence Day celebrations Wallethub has put together a ranking of the most and least “independent” states. Overall New Mexico ranked a mediocre 42nd, but when you dig into the variables, New Mexico appears on some of the worst lists (see below). In the area of “Financial Dependency” New Mexico is 47th while Government Dependency and Job Market Dependency rankings are 48th.

Some of the specific categories included by Wallethub in which New Mexico ranks lowly can be found below.

Check out the screenshot below (or go to the link here). This is obviously contrary to Gov. MLG’s efforts to force EV’s on car-buying New Mexicans. One According to McKinsey & Co. 46% of American EV owners are likely to switch back to internal combustion engine vehicles. wonders how many of these EV owners ALSO own a gas-powered vehicle.

We are two years from MLG’s requirement that 43% of ALL vehicles sold in New Mexico being EV’s. So far she refuses to back down by altering her unrealistic and destructive regulation. 

As we have noted in recent years New Mexico Voices for Children has begun backing away from their own (the report is compiled by Annie E. Casey Foundation and released in NM by Voices and we regret any implication to the contrary) “Kids Count” report which once again ranked New Mexico 50th overall.

Here’s a quote they put out in the wake of the report: 

“New Mexico’s ranking in the education domain is heavily impacted by national standardized test scores, including fourth grade reading proficiency,” said Emily Wildau, KIDS COUNT Coordinator at New Mexico Voices for Children. “Reading proficiency is critical for students to succeed academically and as adults. These scores do not reflect the ability of our children, but rather an education system that is not designed with our multicultural, multilingual students in mind.” New Mexico K-12 students of color and those who are Native American, from low-income families, and who have disabilities tend to not fare as well as their white, more affluent peers, largely as a result of generations of underfunding the education system and a lack of culturally responsive instruction and support.

There are so many rebuttals:

1. New Mexico spends a great deal on K-12 education. Some states spend more and some spend less, but New Mexico has been nowhere near the bottom in K-12 spending for years.
2. What happened to pre-K as the savior? Pre-K has been “free” and universal for only a few years, but taxpayer-funded pre-K has been around in NM for two decades. Has it had ANY positive impact on student outcomes?
3. Test scores account for JUST TWO of the Kids Count report’s variables. They are really blaming just two variables for New Mexico’s awful 50th ranking?
4. We certainly take issue with the idea that minorities can’t perform well on standardized tests. That seems a bit racist and would undoubtedly be labeled as such if it were asserted by conservatives.
5. Finally, many states with large populations of black and Hispanic students perform WELL on the NAEP and other standardized tests. Maryland, Florida, California, and Texas all have large minority populations yet they blow New Mexico out of the water. We’ve documented Mississippi’s educational improvement as well.
6. Their statement ALMOST could be taken as an endorsement of school choice and giving parents the ability to choose an education that fits with the student’s culture and interests. Alas, Voices opposes school choice.

Like New Mexico Hawaii is a “deep blue” state. It also has no oil and gas to speak of. They certainly don’t have $15.2 billion in tax revenue from the industry in a single year. And while Hawaii’s income tax burden is heavier than New Mexico’s, under this plan their income tax burden will be lower than New Mexico’s once fully implemented.

Yet, Hawaii recently enacted significant income tax cuts. And, unlike New Mexico’s paltry cuts (which were partially offset by tax hikes and wasteful tax credits) Hawaii’s tax reductions are significant. Hawaii’s tax cuts dramatically expand the standard deduction under the income tax taking it from $4,400 joint or $2,200 single to $24,000 or $12,000 for joint and single filers respectively.

 There are also rate reductions to Hawaii’s income tax although the top rate of 11% is far too high (at least fewer people will be paying it). Hawaii’s tax reform is not perfect. It is highly progressive, but it is MUCH better than nothing or the slight tax reductions we’ve seen since the oil boom really kicked into gear.

New Mexico remains in the midst of an unprecedented oil and gas boom. When will average New Mexicans see the benefit?

Johnny Cash pretty much explains the last few weeks for us at the Rio Grande Foundation. The only difference is that all of our travel for RGF has been within New Mexico. Here’s where we’ve been:

Primary election radio coverage for 3 hours on KSFR in Santa Fe;

Traveled to Farmington for Four Corners FRW meeting and other meetings;

The following week took us to Gallup for a presentation to the Rotary Club

Monday of this week we held events with school choice expert and advocate Corey De’Angelis

On Wednesday and Thursday we headed to Deming for a Rotary meeting and Las Cruces for a presentation to the Coalition of Conservatives in Action and various meetings.

Summer means lots of time on the road and talking issues with various groups. If you want to hear about the Rio Grande Foundation and its research/work on limited government and individual liberty in New Mexico send an email: info@riograndefoundation.org

We’ll have video and audio of Corey’s talk. In the meantime here’s a photo of the Albuquerque event:

On this week’s show Paul talks to private space expert Doug Messier about the latest from Virgin Galactic, their collapsing stock price, and challenges they face turning a profit in the future. Messier writes at his substack.

The following appeared in the Santa Fe New Mexican (and other media outlets).

On this week’s Tipping Point interview Paul talks to independent researcher Leanna Derrick. Derrick has been working to uncover and highlight the outsized influence of “progressive” group Emerge New Mexico which recruits, trains, and funds left wing women in public office throughout New Mexico. They discuss the “Emerge” group which operates in two dozen states. Who funds them? What do they do and what has been happening here in New Mexico with Emerge-recruited and backed candidates? Check out this important conversation. Leanna Derrick can be reached by email at: 68sharpie@gmail.com

Recently Gov. Lujan Grisham’s Environment Department Secretary James Kenney traveled to Australia with other members of the Administration. The trip, taken at taxpayer expense, wound up costing New Mexicans $15,000 (instead of $2,000) because the Secretary wanted to fly Business Class. This was a violation of New Mexico’s rules according to the Auditor’s office (check out the story from KOAT 7 here).

RGF’s president was asked to comment and discussed both the financial aspect of the trip as well as the fact that MLG is possibly the most anti-traditional energy Gov. in New Mexico history and yet neither Zoom nor even an economy class ticket were deemed adequate. As is typically the case MLG and her “green” agenda only apply to average New Mexicans, not herself and her own staff.

You may not hear about it from Gov. or liberal media outlets, but 100 years ago was arguably the most important economic event in modern New Mexico history: discovery of oil. One can argue that the creation of Los Alamos/the Atomic bomb and the military-industrial complex in New Mexico trumps oil and gas, but they are neck and neck.

Anyway, this weekend in Artesia they are celebrating the 100th anniversary of the discovery of oil and gas in Eddy County in the Permian Basin. Energy expert Alex Epstein is speaking and it seems like a fantastic event. Check it out if you are anywhere near Artesia on Saturday.

Oil and gas not only generate much of New Mexico’s budget, but they provide the US energy security and affordability that are simply not available in many areas of the world. If our politicians supported the role of energy in making America a great nation and used the money to improve life for New Mexicans we’d all be better off. Happy 100 oil and gas! We believe the industry has at least another 100 years here in New Mexico.

The Pew Center on the States does great work tracking American patterns of population growth. Their most recent report is worth a close look for New Mexicans and elected officials in the state.

You can see from the map below that New Mexico’s low population rate since 2008 lags the nation as a whole.

What is truly stunning, however, is that New Mexico actually lags every state West of Kansas in population growth over the 15 year time span considered.

Perhaps the scariest thing Pew considers is their projection that by 2040 New Mexico is expected to see a net population decline. New Mexico is not the only state projected to begin losing population by 2040, but we ARE the only state West of the Mississippi projected to do that. Of course, the future is not set in stone. New Mexico COULD use its oil and gas wealth to bring long-overdue policy changes to the State. But, we need change in the Legislature to make it happen.

According to the latest data from the Legislative Finance Committee (discussed in the Albuquerque Journal) New Mexico piled up an astonishing $15.2 billion in oil and gas tax revenues in FY 2023.

Here are a few details:

Oil and gas revenue to New Mexico has more than quadrupled over the past five years, according to the LFC.

In a bit of good news, the LFC has even acknowledged that “New Mexico could still reap gains from high oil production for nearly a decade.” Some analysts have predicted imminent shortfalls.

Sadly, the same economic ignorance among policymakers and analysts DOES continue when the topic turns to potential uses of the massive windfall. When analysts claim that,  “(The windfall) makes it difficult to grow more independent from the volatile oil and gas industry” that highlights a serious lack of vision. New Mexico shouldn’t be this dependent on oil and gas forever because the revenue available should be used to lower taxes and bring new businesses and industries to New Mexico.

Of course, such thinking requires common sense and logic (both of which are in short supply in Santa Fe these days) so we continue to pile more money into a combination of government “permanent” funds, corporate welfare, and new spending (none of which do much for the state economy).

The latest Kids Count report by the Annie E. Casey Foundation is in and (yet again) New Mexico remains dead last. As we noted last year, the partner organization in New Mexico which publishes the report Voices for Children, continues to back away from their own report because it only highlights the failure of “progressive” economic and education policies in New Mexico. Voices has one paltry quote in the Albuquerque Journal regarding their report and even THAT quote is an obvious attempt to cast doubt on the findings.

“Even though the results aren’t showing up this year or next year, we have a lot of faith that they will show up over the long term. So we should not be discouraged.”

Other advocates argue (without merit) that New Mexico’s “economic reality” prevents the State from performing well in the report. But, even with New Mexico’s massive oil and gas surplus and rapidly-growing spending the State has continued to struggle. The model of economic reform (lower taxes, deregulation, education reform) advocated by Rio Grande Foundation has sadly NOT been attempted in “blue” New Mexico.

In this year’s report New Mexico improved on 7 metrics and declined on 7 metrics. Yet again, New Mexico ranks dead last in education.

Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-Radical environmental groups) is back at it. His latest “accomplishment” is bringing $6.9 million in federal dollars to purchase 20 new electric school buses for Albuquerque’s Public Schools (see embedded tweet below). Quick math tells us that these buses cost at least $345,000 each while a quick Internet search found that a diesel version of the same bus can be purchased for about $100,000. 

We don’t know what the additional chargers and other potential facilities will be needed for the new EV buses, but we DO know that numerous districts that have received these subsidized buses have had serious problems from manufacturing defects to poor performance in cold weather to “a lot of downtime.”

Electrifying school buses is about making sure our kids aren’t breathing in dangerous diesel fumes. Proud to welcome $6.9 million from our Infrastructure Law to purchase 20 new clean electric buses for @ABQschools. pic.twitter.com/1U2aLiRsP5

— Martin Heinrich (@SenatorHeinrich) June 8, 2024

While Heinrich’s desire to “electrify” everything truly knows no bounds it is amusing that several “studies” purport to show that diesel buses cause issues for children. One would think that with generations of American kids having ridden diesel buses that finding a control group would be rather easy. Also, if there really ARE problems, perhaps something ought to be done to address diesel fumes rather than embarking upon a foolhardy switch to an inferior technology. But, we already know the Biden/Heinrich EV bus craze is about politics, not the environment and certainly not our kids’ health.