Rnews Crooked Bough News Round-up: Source NM

Source NM

— NM Legislature day 18 recap: Inaugural Maternal Health Day; bills crossing chambers: at 2/6/26 5:15pm
Kamella Cruz (Ohkay Owingeh) rocks Romilly Cruz, 8 months, to sleep in the halls of the Roundhouse on Feb. 6, 2025. Friday marked American Indian Day and the first-ever Maternal Health Day at the New Mexico Legislature. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)Friday’s commemorations at the Roundhouse included American Indian Day and the first-ever Maternal Health Day. For some attendees, the overlapping observances drew light to two grim statistics. New Mexico for years has grappled with an outsized maternal mortality rate. Likewise, Native and Alaskan American women experience maternal mortality rates two to three times higher than non-Hispanic white mothers, according to a series of reports on Native American maternal health published late last year. Nicolle Arthun (Navajo Nation) addressed a crowd of midwives, doulas and other birth workers in the Rotunda Friday afternoon and urged them to continue “building relationships with each other.” “That’s where good policy begins,” she told them. “With each of us.” Arthun, one of the contributors to the advisory group to the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, told Source NM she hoped that in the future tribal leaders would engage on the issue along with lawmakers. “It takes a community to elevate an issue to tell lawmakers what’s important and what’s a priority,” she told Source NM. “It can’t be just this year, it has to be every year. It’s not just important today.” Crossing chambers As the midpoint of the session just passed, legislation is beginning to cross over from one chamber to the other. The centerpiece of the session, House Bill 2, which contains the $11 billion dollar state budget, is now before the Senate Finance Committee. The committee plans to have several hearings in the coming days, Senate Democrats’ spokesperson Chris Nordstrum told Source NM Friday. He said the goal is to clear the Senate Finance Committee by the end of next week. On Thursday, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed two bills into law to ease barriers for moving and practicing medicine for physicians and social workers, but the House has passed additional compacts for a variety of professions. Those interstate compacts are for: physician assistants in House Bill 10; audiology and speech language pathologists in House Bill 11; physical therapists in House Bill 12; occupational therapists in House Bill 13; dentists and dental hygienists in House Bill 14; emergency medical personnel in House Bill 31; counselors in House Bill 32; psychologists in House Bill 33; and school nurses in House Bill 34. Each compact bill is assigned to the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee. Chair Linda López (D-Albuquerque) told Source NM in the Roundhouse Friday morning that it is “tradition” to prioritize hearings for legislation that originated in the Senate. “We’ll hear some of the House bills, but not until sometime mid-next week,” she said. Senate Bill 3, which would change the definition of the phrases “harm to self” and “harm to others” in state law, unanimously advanced out of the House Judiciary on Wednesday and heads to the House floor next. Behavioral health advocates early in the session told lawmakers they were concerned the changes could be weaponized to forcibly commit people to treatment they don’t want or need to receive. A pair of education bills to overhaul qualifications for math and reading literacy — Senate Bill 29, and Senate Bill 37, respectively — will have a Saturday morning hearing in the House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee. That same committee will also likely hear Senate Bill 64, a noted priority of the governor’s which would establish the Office of Special Education, next week. Final count Source NM previously reported that, as of publication time on Wednesday afternoon (the last chance for lawmakers to introduce proposed laws for the ongoing 30-day legislative session), New Mexico’s elected senators and representatives had filed 553 bills. Source NM’s Bill Tracker shows that they kept filing into the night, though. The final count for newly proposed bills is 686. So far, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has signed six bills — less than 1% of all proposed legislation — into law. The home stretch? Lawmakers gathered around the governor on the fourth floor of the Roundhouse Thursday to celebrate the signing of four priority bills that focused on interstate medical compacts, ICE detention and $1.5 billion in statewide road projects. Two of the governor’s main priorities continue to work their way through each chamber of the Legislature. Work to fully fund universal child care and reform medical malpractice remains unfinished. A bipartisan majority on the Senate Education Committee on Friday advanced a bill, co-sponsored by Sen. George Muñoz (D-Gallup), that would fund Lujan Grisham’s universal child care initiative and only implement co-pays for higher-earning families under certain economic conditions. A number of stakeholders, from the governor’s office and lawmakers to health care officials and advocates, have spent weeks negotiating medical malpractice reform. House Bill 99 would implement sweeping reforms by putting a cap on punitive damages for physicians across the state and raising the bar for juries to award punitive damages. However, an “unfriendly amendment” — meaning the bill’s sponsors oppose it — to keep limitless punitive damages for corporate-owned hospitals divided an otherwise bipartisan coalition. At a bill signing ceremony Thursday morning, Lujan Grisham said she was concerned about the amendment, but remained optimistic that meaningful reform would cross the finish line before the Legislature adjourns for the year on Feb. 19. Senate confirms new child advocate Dawn Walters, a former director of the Children, Youth and Families Department’s Office of Advocacy, was confirmed on Feb. 6, 2026 as the new child advocate, an independent oversight office for child welfare housed in the New Mexico Department of Justice. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) The New Mexico Senate on Friday confirmed Dawn Walters to lead the new Office of the Child Advocate. Lujan Grisham nominated Walters, who led the state Children, Youth & Families Department’s Office of Advocacy, in January. Officials in the new advocate’s office are charged with investigating complaints on behalf of children in state custody or families interacting with CYFD. The office is under the auspices of the New Mexico Department of Justice. Walters will start her new position in March. Rallying for public lands Janet Earle, 69, a retired accountant living near Cochiti Lake, said public lands are New Mexicans’ birthright, and she opposed the Trump administration efforts to sell them. “I fish, I hike, I forest bathe — we need these lands for ourselves, for our kids,” Earle said. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) The second and third floor of the Roundhouse were standing-room only for a rally in support of public lands, which began outside as part of “Camo at the Capitol Day.” Friday’s speakers in defense of public lands included U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), who addressed the crowd and praised the Legislature’s work to invest in public lands and make New Mexico “the envy of much of the West.”
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, 2026 New Mexico Legislative session]
— ‘They’ll never take our public lands from our public hands’: U.S. Sen. Heinrich rallies Roundhouse: at 2/6/26 4:35pm
U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM) addressed a crowded Roundhouse rotunda Friday afternoon as part of “Camo at the Capitol Day” and called New Mexico “the envy of much of the West.” (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-NM), clad in a camouflage vest over his collared shirt, took the mic in the Roundhouse rotunda Friday afternoon while onlookers crowded around the third-floor railing looking down. “We have the leadership of the House and the Senate here in New Mexico stand up for public lands, water and wildlife in the last five years in a way that has never been seen in our state before,” Heinrich told the crowd. He pointed to the Land of Enchantment Legacy Fund, which directs state money to land, water, agriculture and outdoor recreation projects. He said it has made New Mexico “the envy of much of the West.” Heinrich’s remarks came as part of “Camo at the Capitol Day,” which was dedicated to giving climate and public lands advocates an opportunity to tell their state representatives and lawmakers that they support conservation policies. The New Mexico Wildlife Federation on social media encouraged attendees to wear camo to send the message: “We hunt. We vote. We matter.” Other speakers included Rep. Angelica Rubio (D-Las Cruces) and Sen. Angel Charley (D-Acoma). “It makes me incredibly proud to be a New Mexican,” Heinrich told the crowd. “They’ll never take our public lands from our public hands.” After his remarks, Source NM asked Heinrich about President Donald Trump’s nomination of former New Mexico Republican Congressman Steve Pearce to lead the federal Bureau of Land Management and the federal government’s attempts to sell off public lands. If confirmed, Pearce, who founded an oilfield services company before entering the political arena, would oversee 245 million acres of public lands nationally that are used for recreation, grazing and the oil and gas industry. “I’m going to reserve judgment until after his hearing,” Heinrich told Source NM. “But as you can imagine, having known him for 20 years and being on different sides of a number of different issues, I’m going to have some probing questions for him.” Last summer, Heinrich was a vocal opponent of the federal government’s attempts to sell off public lands and roll back protections, such as the so-called “roadless rule.” On Friday, he said he believes the Trump administration has shifted its strategy to target public lands in a piecemeal fashion, rather than seeking to sell them wholesale. “It’s a way for them to roll back some of the protections that we have created with the community involved and to do it in a way where they’re not taking on the whole country,” Heinrich, the ranking member of the U.S. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said. “We’re going to keep standing up for these places, because they’re part of our culture and they’re great for our economy and they’re a reflection of our democracy.”
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, Environment & Climate Change, 2026 New Mexico Legislative session, U.S. Sen. Martin Heinrich]
— NM memorial calling for study of forced sterilization against women of color advances: at 2/6/26 3:20pm
An historical poster from 1977 created by Rachael Romero for the Wilfred Owen Brigade in San Francisco, California. (Library of Congress)Members of the New Mexico Legislatures House Government, Elections and Indian Affairs Committee advanced a memorial Friday that calls for a “comprehensive” study of the scope and impact of forced sterilization of Indigenous women and women of color in New Mexico. House Memorial 32 requests the New Mexico Indian Affairs Department and the New Mexico Commission on the Status of Women identify all cases of forced or coerced sterilization that have occurred in the state and gather survivor testimony. The memorial requests that the agencies evaluate the availability of reproductive health services for women of color and recommend actions the state can take to prevent future forced sterilization practices. The legislation also requests that the study explore creating a reproductive sovereignty program “focused on culturally grounded health, education and healing services,” developing a public memorial and having the state formally acknowledge the “inhumanity of the grievous policy” of forced sterilization. The memorial states that the study must be completed and presented to the Legislature and governor by Dec. 31, 2027. Keely Badger, an international human rights attorney, joined Friday’s meeting as an expert specializing in Indigenous women’s rights issues. According to Badger, if the memorial passes, New Mexico would become the first state in the U.S. to acknowledge the historical scope and continued impacts of these practices. “Coerced and forced sterilization is considered a crime against humanity under international law and also constituting genocide, both biological and cultural genocide, in certain contexts,” Badger said. “It’s estimated that over 70,000 Native American women and women of color were forcibly sterilized just in the 70s alone, when these eugenics laws were on the books.” Jean Whitehorse (Diné), the daughter of a Navajo Code Talker, told the committee about her experience in Gallup in 1972. She said she was admitted to the hospital for a ruptured appendix and was required to sign multiple forms for the emergency surgery. “I didn’t know one of those papers was for sterilization,” Whitehorse said. She has one daughter and said she wanted more children. “My ability to have more children was medically terminated without my consent. Within our Navajo culture, wealth goes beyond monetary value and material possession. True wealth is the number of children one has.” HM32’s lead sponsor Rep. Patricia Roybal-Caballero (D-Albuquerque) shared that she had a late term miscarriage years ago and had to have a procedure. However, the paperwork stated she was to have a hysterectomy instead. “Had [my husband] not seen the checked box indicating that I was being wheeled in for a hysterectomy, I would have had a hysterectomy and been deprived…of further pregnancies,” Roybal-Caballero said. “For me, to hear about cases existing in this day and age, I had nothing more than to be compelled, obligated, a responsibility to ensure that these processes and these institutions stop this forced and coerced sterilization.” Donald Clark, a physician practicing family medicine, told the committee that he worked with the Indian Health Service throughout his career and continues to work in tribal clinics. He said he supported the memorial because the impacts of previous forced sterilization is still affecting younger generations. “The issue continues to come up sometimes in younger women and women who are in their 20s and 30s seeking contraception, but not trusting that they will not be irreversibly sterilized because of what they’ve heard from their mother or grandmother or an aunt,” he said. “It’s still an issue that is affecting women’s choice of birth control today.”
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, Health, forced sterilization, Indigenous]
— Environmental groups condemn legislation expanding New Mexico oil and gas wastewater use: at 2/6/26 1:51pm
New Mexico Rep. Cathrynn Brown (R-Carlsbad), the lead sponsor of House Bill 207 to expand oil and gas wastewater use, photographed in her Capitol office on Feb. 6, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)New Mexico environmental groups are raising alarms over legislation that would potentially expand the use of oil and gas wastewater in the state. Specifically, House Bill 207 would require the state’s Water Quality Control Commission to adopt rules and issue permits by the end of 2026 that would expand where oil and gas wastewater can be used. The WQCC’s current rules limit such water, known as “produced water,” to oilfields and research pilot projects. An amendment to HB207 specifies those expanded uses to include spraying it across roads to prevent dust or ice issues; using it in construction sites; employing it for manufacturing and energy production, such as hydrogen and geothermal energy. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham authorized the bill last week for the 30-day session, which is otherwise statutorily limited to the budget. In a statement, the governor’s Communications Director Michael Coleman said the governor “remains committed to advancing responsible and protective produced water reuse rules” to offset demand for freshwater, citing the 50-Year Water Action Plan. Environmental advocates, however, say the legislation circumvents the existing process for creating such rules. The legislation’s introduction marks the latest chapter in ongoing clashes between environmentalists and industry, as well as the governor’s longstanding legislative efforts to expand the use of produced water, which is extremely salty and poses challenges for treatment. The current bill, originally sponsored by five Permian Basin Republican representatives, now has bipartisan support from Sen. Roberto “Bobby” Gonzales (D-Ranchos de Taos) and Rep. Cynthia Borrego (D-Albuquerque). Lead sponsor Cathrynn Brown (R-Carlsbad) told Source NM she appreciates the governor’s backing on the bill and said they both agree the state is in need of additional water supplies. “New Mexico’s an arid state and we need every drop of water we can get,” Brown said in an interview in her office. “Produced water, after it’s treated, is very suitable for a number of applications.” Tannis Fox, a senior attorney at Western Environmental Law Center, in a call with Source NM called HB207 a “wrongheaded” measure, and said peer-reviewed evidence is inconclusive that produced water can be treated safely at scale. “The oil and gas industry has a produced water problem,” Fox said. “They are pushing reuse and discharge of treated produced water at a point in time when our water resources are not ready to take it. Treatment is not ready for prime time. And I think it is profit-driven over protection of human health and the environment.” Tension over produced water rulemaking ignited last year after an oil-and-gas industry-aligned group, the Water, Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance, successfully petitioned the WQCC to rewrite adopted rules limiting produced water uses. Numerous environmental groups in turn called for the WQCC to overturn that decision and disqualify members who they alleged had been “compromised by interference” from Lujan Grisham. The WQCC ultimately overturned its controversial decision, while the governor’s office consistently denied any wrongdoing in the process. HB207 unfairly attempts to upend that previous rulemaking, according to Sarah Knopp, a policy specialist for Taos water conservation group Amigos Bravos. “HB207 is an effort to overturn a democratic and independent process of the Water Quality Control Commission to protect human health and the environment,” Knopp told Source NM in a phone call. “We cannot afford to make a mistake by discharging treated produced water too hastily, because the cost to the environment will be catastrophic if this is allowed to happen before theres long-term scientific evidence to show that its safe.” HB207 heads to its first committee: House Acequias, Agriculture and Water Resources on Saturday morning. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, Environment & Climate Change, 50-year Water Advocacy Plan, oil and gas wastewater, produced water, Produced Water Act, produced water reuse, Rep. Cathrynn Brown]
— NM Senate committee advances universal child care bill with new co-pay proposal: at 2/6/26 12:42pm
Sen. George Muñoz (D-Gallup) at a bill signing on Feb. 5, 2026, told the governor and lawmakers that he was co-sponsoring a bill to only require child care co-pays in a limited number of circumstances. The Senate Education Committee on Feb. 6, 2026, voted to advance his bill. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)The New Mexico Senate Education Committee on Friday advanced a universal child care bill that would only require co-pays from high-earning families under specific economic circumstances. Senate Bill 241, co-sponsored by Sen. George Muñoz (D-Gallup), would complement the governor’s statewide universal child care program. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham announced the initiative late last year, though lawmakers this session have disagreed over whether the program should be at least partially funded by co-pays. Muñoz’s bill would subject families whose pre-tax household income is more than 600% but less than 900% of the federal poverty level to child care co-pays if any of several conditions occur, including a decline on the average price of west Texas intermediate crude oil. Enrollment numbers in the program and slowed state revenue growth could also lead to co-pays. For a family of three, 600% of the federal poverty level is $163,920, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Muñoz told committee members he believes the state is in a good position to fund universal child care. The triggers for enacting co-pays — “guardrails,” as he calls them — are there as necessary backstops to make the program more recession-proof. “You can’t tell someone, ‘I’m going to build this’ and then, ‘Oh, I ran out of money’ and jerk it out from under them,” Muñoz told Source NM after the vote. Republicans on the committee, including Sen. Candy Spence Ezzell (R-Roswell), said they understood the intent behind the bill. But they expressed reservations about its financial sustainability and questioned whether hitching co-pays to the price of oil was prudent given the state’s push to embrace renewable energy sources. “Fiscal sustainability of this is going to be iffythat gives me concerns about what families are going to be able to do,” she said during the hearing, before adding: “I understand the intent of this, I really do.” Democratic committee members pushed back and cited the balance of the state’s Early Childhood Trust Fund, which in September was worth nearly $11 billion. “We dont have to be skittish about whether there would be enough money going forward,” Committee Chair Sen. Bill Soules (D-Las Cruces) said during the hearing, citing the governor’s December request for nearly $161 million to fully fund the initiative. “It would be decades before wed eat up that trust fund.” Sen. Gabriel Ramos (R-Silver City) voted alongside Democrats in the 6-3 vote. Muñoz’s bill stands in contrast to the House-approved budget plan, which would require co-pays from families that make 400% of the federal poverty level. In a news conference Thursday, Lujan Grisham criticized the proposal and said a program is not truly universal if it unevenly requires payments from some families but not others. House Speaker Rep. Javier Martínez (D-Albuquerque), for his part, said he thought the House’s budget was “building toward” universal child care, but supported co-pays in the meantime. Muñoz, though, maintained on Friday that he thinks the program should be truly universal and apply to all New Mexico families. “If you’re in the higher end, why aren’t you allowed to benefit along with the lower end?” he asked. “It’s fair to everyone in New Mexico.”
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, 2026 New Mexico Legislative session]
— White House takes down racist meme of Obamas posted on Trump social media: at 2/6/26 10:39am
Chair of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., on Feb. 5, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Scott criticized President Donald Trump's use of a racist meme on social media. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday pulled down a social media post depicting former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys after members of Congress from both political parties expressed dismay and called it racist. A White House spokesperson told States Newsroom around noon that a “staffer erroneously made the post” that was shared on President Donald Trump’s social media platform late Thursday night. But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote in a statement earlier in the day the video wasn’t a real issue. This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King,” she wrote. “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public. The White House press office also shared via email the full video, which was published in October. Trump shared a clip of the video on his social media account on Thursday at 11:44 p.m. Eastern within another video about allegations of 2020 election fraud in Michigan. The decision to delete Trump’s social media post followed hours of pushback from lawmakers. “Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House,” wrote South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott. “The President should remove it.” Scott is chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which is tasked with ensuring the GOP maintains its majority in that chamber following November’s midterm elections. Nebraska Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts posted that, “Even if this was a Lion King meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this. The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake: remove this and apologize.” New York Republican Rep. Mike Lawler wrote the “post is wrong and incredibly offensive — whether intentional or a mistake — and should be deleted immediately with an apology offered.” Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker called the post totally unacceptable. “The president should take it down and apologize.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., described the video as something that “is dangerous and degrades our country” as well as “Racist. Vile. Abhorrent.” “The President must immediately delete the post and apologize to Barack and Michelle Obama, two great Americans who make Donald Trump look like a small, envious man,” Schumer wrote. Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin posted, This is racist garbage from President Trump. If you’re finding yourself defending it, you’re on the wrong side of history. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote that “President Obama and Michelle Obama are brilliant, compassionate and patriotic Americans. They represent the best of this country.” “Donald Trump is a vile, unhinged and malignant bottom feeder,” Jeffries added. “Why are GOP leaders like John Thune continuing to stand by this sick individual? Every single Republican must immediately denounce Donald Trump’s disgusting bigotry.” New York Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, wrote that while some people “still find Donald Trump’s behavior shocking. I do not.” “This is the man who built his political fortune by way of a vile campaign of birther lies and harassment against President Obama,” Clarke wrote. “Bigotry has been his brand since Day 1, and the wretched ‘yes’ men who surround him enabling or endorsing this conduct aren’t going to change that. “As his scandals continue to escalate, and as he continues to lose the little lucidity that remains with him, I expect Donald to only retreat deeper into the sewers of racism and ignorance. That’s where he’s most at home. That’s where he’s most comfortable.” Virginia Democratic Rep. Don Beyer wrote, “Donald Trump greets the first week of Black History Month with one of the most racist things hes ever posted. This man is unwell.”
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics]
— White House takes down meme of Obamas posted on Trump social media and slammed as racist: at 2/6/26 10:39am
Chair of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., on Feb. 5, 2026, in Washington, D.C. Scott criticized President Donald Trump's use of a racist meme on social media. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The White House on Friday pulled down a social media post depicting former President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama as monkeys after members of Congress from both political parties expressed dismay and called it racist. A White House spokesperson told States Newsroom around noon that a “staffer erroneously made the post” that was shared on President Donald Trump’s social media platform late Thursday night. But White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote in a statement earlier in the day the video wasn’t a real issue. This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King,” she wrote. “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public. The White House press office also shared via email the full video, which was published in October. Trump shared a clip of the video on his social media account on Thursday at 11:44 p.m. Eastern within another video about allegations of 2020 election fraud in Michigan. The decision to delete Trump’s social media post followed hours of pushback from lawmakers. “Praying it was fake because it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House,” wrote South Carolina Republican Sen. Tim Scott. “The President should remove it.” Scott is chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, which is tasked with ensuring the GOP maintains its majority in that chamber following November’s midterm elections. Nebraska Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts posted that, “Even if this was a Lion King meme, a reasonable person sees the racist context to this. The White House should do what anyone does when they make a mistake: remove this and apologize.” New York Republican Rep. Mike Lawler wrote the “post is wrong and incredibly offensive — whether intentional or a mistake — and should be deleted immediately with an apology offered.” Mississippi Republican Sen. Roger Wicker called the post totally unacceptable. “The president should take it down and apologize.” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., described the video as something that “is dangerous and degrades our country” as well as “Racist. Vile. Abhorrent.” “The President must immediately delete the post and apologize to Barack and Michelle Obama, two great Americans who make Donald Trump look like a small, envious man,” Schumer wrote. Michigan Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin posted, This is racist garbage from President Trump. If you’re finding yourself defending it, you’re on the wrong side of history. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., wrote that “President Obama and Michelle Obama are brilliant, compassionate and patriotic Americans. They represent the best of this country.” “Donald Trump is a vile, unhinged and malignant bottom feeder,” Jeffries added. “Why are GOP leaders like John Thune continuing to stand by this sick individual? Every single Republican must immediately denounce Donald Trump’s disgusting bigotry.” New York Democratic Rep. Yvette Clarke, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, wrote that while some people “still find Donald Trump’s behavior shocking. I do not.” “This is the man who built his political fortune by way of a vile campaign of birther lies and harassment against President Obama,” Clarke wrote. “Bigotry has been his brand since Day 1, and the wretched ‘yes’ men who surround him enabling or endorsing this conduct aren’t going to change that. “As his scandals continue to escalate, and as he continues to lose the little lucidity that remains with him, I expect Donald to only retreat deeper into the sewers of racism and ignorance. That’s where he’s most at home. That’s where he’s most comfortable.” Virginia Democratic Rep. Don Beyer wrote, “Donald Trump greets the first week of Black History Month with one of the most racist things hes ever posted. This man is unwell.”
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics]
— The true cost of climate change? New Mexico families are already paying it: at 2/6/26 8:55am
New Mexico Voices for Children policy analyst Maya Anthony writes that New Mexico families are already paying the cost of climate change, and notes the scorched forests from catastrophic wildfires, such as Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon, pictured above. (Courtesy Santa Fe National Forest) For years, we’ve been told that taking bold action on climate change is simply too expensive. That transitioning off fossil fuels, preparing for wildfires, or investing in clean energy would bankrupt the state. But a new analysis of state government data tells a very different story–it’s the cost of inaction that’s breaking the bank. In 2025 interim committee hearings, New Mexico lawmakers heard over $4 billion in climate-related costs — not from projections, but from actual budget requests, tax losses, and disaster impacts. These figures span different timeframes, but together offer a powerful snapshot of climate’s mounting financial toll. Behind each of those dollars is a story — of families driven from their generational homes by wildfire, of ranchers forced to sell off livestock due to drought, and of children struggling to breathe during a heatwave. This is not an abstract crisis. We see it in the $38.5 million allocated to replant forests scorched by the Hermits Peak/Calf Canyon Fire and South Fork Fire. In the more than $1.2 billion spent trying to secure enough water for a state drying out fast. The price of delay is rising, and communities on the frontlines are paying most. Even when we adjusted the numbers by population, counties at the heart of oil and gas development, like San Juan, Lea, and Eddy, consistently showed the highest per capita climate costs. These are the same counties where families face polluted air, rising asthma rates, and cracked roads from extreme heat. The same counties where local governments are left scrambling to rebuild after floods or fires with far too little help. Here’s the truth: climate action isn’t too expensive, climate disasters are. The longer we wait, the more it costs. The more families we displace. The more ecosystems we lose. The more our children inherit a crisis we could have contained. We know what works: preparing for wildfires before they start, supporting clean energy that reduces pollution and creates jobs, and investing in public health and water infrastructure that can withstand what’s coming. During the 2026 legislative session, we urge lawmakers to: Budget for resilience, not just disaster response Prioritize policies that protect people and cut harmful pollution at the source Make sure rural and Tribal communities get their fair share of climate-related investments Recognize the cost of doing nothing is the most expensive path of all We can no longer afford to let industry lobbyists call climate action “too expensive” while New Mexicans are left to foot the real bill in emergency funds, in lost lives, and in a future that grows more uncertain by the day. Let’s change the conversation. Let’s make climate investment about people–about protecting families, livelihoods, and the land we love. The cost of inaction is already here. And we’re already paying it.
[Category: Commentary, climate change, New Mexico Voices For Children]
— ‘It is astonishing’: Congress rebuffs Trump push to slash $33B from health, human services: at 2/6/26 8:50am
U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaks during a policy announcement event at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on Jan. 8, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — Congress has approved the first public health funding bill since President Donald Trump began his second term, with lawmakers largely rejecting his proposed spending cuts and the elimination of dozens of programs. A bipartisan group of negotiators instead struck a deal to increase funding on several line items within the Department of Health and Human Services annual appropriations bill, including for major initiatives at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “When you look at the differences between what was proposed and what was agreed to, it is astonishing,” House Appropriations Committee ranking member Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., said during a hearing on the bill in late January. The Trump administration’s budget request, released in May, called on Congress to cut funding for the Department of Health and Human Services by $33 billion, or 26.2%. The president asked lawmakers to implement an $18 billion funding cut to the NIH, which he argued would bring the agency in line with the Make America Healthy Again agenda. The James H. Shannon Building , or Building One, on the National Institutes of Health campus in Bethesda, Maryland. (Photo by Lydia Polimeni/National Institutes of Health) The Trump administration proposed a $3.6 billion cut for CDC programs, including the elimination of the National Center for Chronic Diseases Prevention and Health Promotion, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, and Public Health Preparedness and Response, all of which it said could “be conducted more effectively by States.” The budget request said more than $1 billion should be cut from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, though it said the administration was “committed to combatting the scourge of deadly drugs that have ravaged American communities.” Trump also requested lawmakers zero out any funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, which he deemed unnecessary. The federal program helps millions of low-income households meet their home energy needs, via states and tribes. The final spending bill Congress approved rejected nearly all of the major cuts. Collins, Murray both praise final product Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, said the bills “reflect months of hard work and deliberation and contributions from members of both parties and on both sides of the Capitol.” “Funding for NIH is not decreased, as was proposed in the administration’s budget,” she said. “Rather, it is increased by $415 million, including increases of $100 million for Alzheimer’s research and $10 million more for diabetes research, with a focus on type 1 diabetes.” U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, speaks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 29, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom) Collins also touted an increase in “funding for low-income heating assistance, which is absolutely crucial for states like Maine and is an issue that I have worked for years on with my Democratic colleague Jack Reed of Rhode Island.” Senate Appropriations Committee ranking member Patty Murray, D-Wash., said the difference between Trump’s budget request and the final bills was like the difference between “night and day.” Our bill rejects President Trump’s asks to rubber stamp his public health sabotage,” she said. “Instead, it doubles down on lifesaving public health investments. It rejects Trump’s efforts to slash opioid response funds. It rejects his proposal to chop the CDC in half. It rejects his call to end programs like title X, the teen pregnancy program, essential HIV initiatives, and more.” Rare bipartisan agreement in Trump’s second term Senators from both political parties indicated last summer they weren’t fully on board with Trump’s budget proposal and used a hearing with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in May and a separate hearing with NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya in June to highlight their concerns. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved its HHS spending bill on a broadly bipartisan vote in July, while the House Appropriations Committee approved its funding bill in September without any Democratic support. Neither of the original bills went to the floor for debate and amendment votes, though negotiations to find compromise on a final bill began late last year after the record-breaking government shutdown ended in November. Washington state Democratic U.S. Sen. Patty Murray, speaks with reporters inside the Capitol building in Washington, D.C., on Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. Also pictured, from left to right, are Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; New Jersey Democratic Sen. Cory Booker and Hawaii Democratic Sen. Brian Schatz. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom) Republicans and Democrats brokered a final agreement on the HHS funding bill in late January, the first time bipartisan agreement was reached during Trump’s second term. Congress previously approved a series of stopgap spending bills to keep HHS up and running, mostly on funding levels and policies last set during the Biden administration. The House originally voted on Jan. 22 to send the package that included funding for HHS to the Senate. But it stalled after federal immigration agents shot and killed a second U.S. citizen in Minnesota and Democrats demanded changes to the spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security. The Senate voted 71-29 on Jan. 30 to send the package back to the House after removing the full-year DHS spending bill and replacing it with a two-week stopgap. The House then voted 217-214 on Tuesday to clear the package for Trump, who signed it later in the day, ending a four-day partial government shutdown. The package also holds funding for the departments of Defense, Education, Housing and Urban Development, Labor, State, Transportation and Treasury. ‘Months of hard work turned into results’ House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., said during floor debate last month the process that led to the final bills proved lawmakers “can make tough decisions.” “This is where months of hard work turned into results,” Cole said. “You see, we aren’t here for just another stopgap temporary fix. We’re here to finish the job by providing full-year funding and specifically this package addresses core areas of national consequence — defense; labor, health and education; and transportation and housing development.” Congress is supposed to pass the dozen full-year appropriations bills by the start of the fiscal year on Oct. 1, though it hasn’t completed all of its work on time in decades. Oklahoma Republican Rep. Tom Cole speaks with reporters following a closed-door meeting of the House Republican Conference inside the Capitol on Jan. 10, 2024. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom) Last fiscal year, it didn’t complete its work at all, making March 2024 the last time Congress approved all of the funding bills. Cole said during debate the programs funded “aren’t abstract concepts on a page, they affect how Americans live, work, learn and travel every day.” DeLauro said the package of bills represents “a strong bipartisan, bicameral agreement that rejects the Trump administration’s efforts to eviscerate public services and reasserts Congress’ power of the purse.” “It provides funding levels, removing ambiguity that the White House sought to exploit in the past,” DeLauro said. “It establishes deadlines for required spending, provides minimum staffing thresholds to prevent agencies from being hollowed out and increases notification requirements to ensure the administration is complying with the laws that Congress makes.” HHS ends up with $210 million bump The bill provides HHS with more than $116 billion, $210 million more in discretionary funding than the previous level and a rejection of Trumps request to cut $33 billion, according to a summary from Murray’s office. NIH will receive $48.7 billion in funding, $415 million more than its current spending level, showing that lawmakers were unwilling to slice its budget by $18 billion as requested. Congress bolstered funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration by $65 million to a total of $7.4 billion, according to Murray’s summary. Trump asked lawmakers to reduce its allocation by more than $1 billion. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services headquarters in Washington, D.C., on Nov. 23, 2023. (Photo by Jane Norman/States Newsroom) A $3.6 billion funding cut for the CDC was also rejected, with appropriators agreeing to provide the Atlanta-based agency with $9.2 billion. A summary of the bill from DeLauro’s office says negotiators were able to keep funding for domestic and global HIV/AIDS activities, Firearm Injury and Mortality Prevention Research and Tobacco Prevention and Control, among other programs that House Republicans originally proposed to zero out. The legislation bolstered, instead of eliminated, funding for the Low Income Energy Assistance Program, or LIHEAP, according to a summary from Cole’s office. The bill, it said, “reprioritizes taxpayer dollars where they matter most: into lifesaving biomedical research and resilient medical supply chains, classrooms and technical programs that set Americans up for success, and rural hospitals and primary health care to support strong and healthy families.” CDC program axed The legislation does eliminate the CDC’s Social Determinants of Health program, which the agency’s website states are “nonmedical factors that influence health outcomes.” Those can include whether a person has access to clean air and water, a well-balanced diet, exercise, a good education, career opportunities, economic stability and a safe place to live. HHS’ Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion writes that “people who dont have access to grocery stores with healthy foods are less likely to have good nutrition. That raises their risk of health conditions like heart disease, diabetes, and obesity — and even lowers life expectancy relative to people who do have access to healthy foods.” Cole’s summary of the HHS spending bill says that program “promoted social engineering while distracting grant recipients from combating infectious and chronic diseases.” The American Public Health Association urged Congress to approve the bill, writing in a statement the compromise “rightly maintains funding for most public health agencies and programs.” “While the bill is not perfect and we disagree with cuts to several HHS agency programs included, overall, the agreement rejects the devastating cuts and nonsensical agency reorganizations proposed by the Trump administration and is a positive outcome,” APHA wrote. “Importantly, the bill also includes language to ensure that CDC and other health agencies maintain an adequate level of staffing to carry out their statutory responsibilities. “The bill will also ensure that Congress exercises its oversight over any future proposed agency reorganizations.”
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics]
— Trump’s calls to ‘nationalize’ elections have state, local election officials bracing for tumult: at 2/6/26 6:20am
FBI agents load boxes of election documents onto trucks at an elections warehouse in Fulton County, Ga. State and local election officials are bracing for the prospect of federal action after President Donald Trump’s call to nationalize elections. (Photo by Ross Williams/Georgia Recorder)President Donald Trump’s calls this week to “nationalize” elections capped a year of efforts by his administration to exercise authority over state-run elections. The demands now have some state and local election officials fearing — and preparing for — a tumultuous year ahead. “I don’t think we can put anything past this administration,” Oregon Democratic Secretary of State Tobias Read told Stateline in an interview. “I think they’re increasingly desperate, increasingly scared about what’s going to happen when they are held accountable by American voters. So we have to be prepared for everything.” Ever since Trump signed an executive order last March that attempted to impose a requirement that voters prove their citizenship in federal elections, the federal government has engaged in a wide-ranging effort to influence how elections are run. Under the U.S. Constitution, that responsibility belongs to the states. Then came Trump’s remarks on a podcast Monday that Republicans should nationalize elections and take over voting in at least 15 places, though he didn’t specify where. In the Oval Office the next day, the president reaffirmed his view that states are “agents” of the federal government in elections. “I don’t know why the federal government doesn’t do them anyway,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday, despite the Constitutions clear delegation of that job to states. Across the country, election officials are watching recent developments and, in some instances, grappling with how the Trump administration’s moves could affect their preparations for November’s midterm elections, which will determine control of Congress. Local election officials say they are considering how they would respond to the presence of federal law enforcement near polling places and what steps they need to take to ensure voting proceeds smoothly. Several Democratic election officials, and some Republicans, have spoken out. Placing voting under control of the federal government would represent a fundamental violation of the Constitution, they note. The U.S. Constitution authorizes states to set the time, place and manner of elections for Congress but also allows Congress to change those regulations. The elections themselves are run by the states. The taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by-piece until there is nothing left. – U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter, in a recent decision “Oh, hell no,” Maine Democratic Secretary of State Shenna Bellows said in a video statement posted to social media about federalizing elections. Bellows, who is running for governor, said she would mail the White House a pocket Constitution, “because it seems they’ve lost their copy.” The U.S. Department of Justice already has sued 24 states and the District of Columbia to obtain unredacted voter rolls that include sensitive personal information that it says is needed to search for noncitizen voters. The Department of Homeland Security wants states to run their voter rolls through a powerful citizenship verification tool. Those opposed to the demand say sharing the data risks the privacy of millions of voters. Many fear the administration could use the information to disqualify eligible voters, challenge the legitimacy of a victory in a closely contested midterm election, or use the information to target political enemies. In recent weeks, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi linked the presence of federal immigration agents in Minneapolis in part to Minnesota’s refusal to turn over its voter rolls. And the FBI seized ballots from an elections warehouse Fulton County, Georgia — a state that was a central focus of Trump’s push to overturn his 2020 election loss. “I think it does affect our planning as far as, what if there is some sort of federal law enforcement presence on Election Day or before or after? So that definitely factors into our planning,” said Scott McDonell, the Democratic clerk in Dane County, Wisconsin, which includes Madison. Ingham County, Michigan, Clerk Barb Byrum, a Democrat running for secretary of state, said she and other election administrators conduct tabletop exercises and keep emergency plans for numerous scenarios. Those used to focus on floods, power outages and cyberattacks. “Now, unfortunately, it’s turning into the president of the United States meddling in elections,” Byrum said. “We will be prepared. Voters will hopefully not see anything different at their polling locations. … But we need to be diligent.” Pamela Smith, president and CEO of the election security nonprofit Verified Voting, said election officials and their lawyers need to study up on laws and regulations, including chain-of-custody requirements for ballots. David Becker, director of the nonpartisan Center for Election Innovation Research, which operates the Election Official Legal Defense Network, said more than 10,000 lawyers have been recruited who are ready to provide pro bono legal assistance or advice to election officials. Trump doubles down on calling for the feds to take over state elections When Stateline asked Read whether he anticipates Oregon facing federal pressure over its voter rolls, the secretary of state said he was set to meet this week with county clerks in the Portland metro area “to talk about that very question.” Reads office later confirmed the meeting took place. Oregon’s largest city, Portland, has been a focus of the Trump administration. Last year, Trump deployed federalized Oregon National Guard members to the city after protests outside an Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility. And federal agents last month shot two people in a hospital parking lot. Portland is a self-described sanctuary city that does not aid the federal government in immigration enforcement. The concern in Oregon comes after Bondi on Jan. 24 sent a letter to Minnesota Democratic Gov. Tim Walz after federal agents killed Renee Good and Alex Pretti in separate shootings in Minneapolis that were captured on video. Bondi’s letter outlined three “common sense solutions” that would help end the “chaos” in Minnesota, she wrote. One of those solutions called for the state to provide the Justice Department with its full, unredacted voter rolls. Minnesota Democratic Secretary of State Steve Simon has called Bondi’s letter an “outrageous attempt to coerce Minnesota” into handing over the data. Simon hasn’t provided the voter list, but White House border czar Tom Homan is pulling 700 immigration agents from Minnesota amid outrage over their presence. Roughly 2,300 agents will remain in the state. In North Carolina, Durham County Director of Elections Derek Bowens called Trump’s rhetoric and recent federal actions concerning. Bowens, a nonpartisan official appointed by the Durham County Board of Elections, said that as long as the rule of law persists, a “constitutional guard” will protect election administration. Still, Bowens, who oversees elections in a largely Democratic area in a presidential swing state, said he and other local officials are preparing to prevent potential “intrusion” into the process. “I’m not at liberty to divulge what that would be in terms of security protocols, but that’s definitely in the forefronts of our minds,” Bowens said in an interview, adding that he would be working with local emergency services officials “to make sure we’re positioned to ensure everyone that is eligible has unfettered access to the ballot box.” Trump wants federal control Trump appears to be crossing a line from urging Congress to set additional election requirements into wanting the federal government’s hands on states’ election administration infrastructure, said Barry Burden, a professor of political science at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and the director of the Elections Research Center at the university. “That would be brand new,” Burden said. After Trump called for nationalizing elections during Monday’s appearance on the podcast of Dan Bongino, a right-wing media personality who was previously a top FBI official, the White House said Tuesday that the president had been referring to legislation in Congress that would require individuals to show proof of citizenship to register to vote. The bill has passed the House but is stalled in the Senate. But Trump late Tuesday doubled down on his original comments during an unrelated bill-signing ceremony in the Oval Office. He suggested the federal government should take a role in vote counting. “The federal government should get involved,” Trump said. “These are agents of the federal government to count the votes. If they cant count the votes legally and honestly, then somebody else should take over.” Even before Trump’s nationalization comments, Democratic state chief election officials and some Republicans had refused to turn over copies of voter rolls containing driver’s license numbers, date of birth and full or partial Social Security numbers after the Justice Department began demanding the data last spring. Federal judges in California and Oregon have ruled those states don’t have to provide the data; numerous other lawsuits against other states are ongoing. Missouri Secretary of State Denny Hoskins, a Trump-supporting Republican who campaigned for office on calls to hand-count ballots, told a Missouri House committee on Tuesday that he wouldn’t provide the state’s full voter list without a court order. He said his office had only shared a public version of the voter rolls; Missouri hasn’t been sued by the Justice Department. The Trump administration has previously confirmed it is sharing records with Homeland Security, which operates an online program that it uses to verify citizenship. The Justice Department has also offered some states a confidential agreement to search their voter lists. “Clean voter rolls and basic election safeguards are requisites for free, fair, and transparent elections,” Assistant U.S. Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon wrote in a statement to Stateline. “The DOJ Civil Rights Division has a statutory mandate to enforce our federal voting rights laws, and ensuring the voting public’s confidence in the integrity of our elections is a top priority of this administration.” But U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter, a Clinton appointee, wrote in a Jan. 15 decision that the voter roll demands risk a chilling effect on Americans who may opt not to register to vote over concerns about how their information could be used. He dismissed the Justice Department’s lawsuit seeking California’s voter rolls. “The taking of democracy does not occur in one fell swoop; it is chipped away piece-by-piece until there is nothing left. The case before the Court is one of these cuts that imperils all Americans,” Carter wrote in a 33-page decision. Some Republicans oppose nationalization Amid Trump’s call for nationalizing elections, some Republican election officials have broken with the president even as they have avoided criticizing him directly. State control has long been a central tenant of conservatism, though Trump has challenged elements of Republican orthodoxy over the past decade. Hoskins, the Missouri secretary of state, told state lawmakers on Tuesday, “I personally don’t believe we should nationalize elections.” Georgia Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger in a news release on Monday urged lawmakers to focus on strengthening state administration of elections. He said that was better than “moving to federalize a core function of state government.” Raffensperger, who is running for governor this year, was famously targeted by Trump following the 2020 election to overturn his loss in Georgia. In a phone call, Trump told Raffensperger he wanted to “find 11,780 votes” — the size of his loss in the state. Raffensperger refused to aid Trump. Five years later, Raffensperger now faces pressure from Georgia state lawmakers to provide the state’s unredacted voter list to the Justice Department. The Georgia Senate on Monday passed a resolution calling on the secretary of state to fully comply with the department’s request. Georgia Republican state Sen. Randy Robertson, the resolution’s lead sponsor, said during a state Senate committee hearing last month that federal law supersedes limits on data sharing in Georgia law. He didn’t respond to an interview request. In a statement to Stateline, Raffensperger said that state law is “very clear” that officials aren’t allowed to turn over the information. I will always follow the law and the Constitution,” Raffensperger wrote. The Georgia Senate vote came less than a week after the FBI searched the Fulton County elections warehouse and seized ballots. Fulton County, which includes much of the Atlanta metro area, was where Trump was indicted on charges of conspiracy and racketeering related to his efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election. The case was dismissed last year. The Justice Department didn’t answer a question from Stateline about whether it plans to seek search warrants for other election offices. On Wednesday, Fulton County filed a motion in federal court demanding the return of the seized ballots and other materials, Fulton County Board of Commissioners Chair Robb Pitts, a Democrat, said at a news conference. The motion also asks for the unsealing of the affidavit used by the FBI to support its search warrant application. “We will fight using all resources against those who seek to take over our elections,” Pitts said. “Our Constitution itself is at stake in this fight.” Stateline reporter Jonathan Shorman can be reached at jshorman@stateline.org. This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Source New Mexico, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
— ‘We’ve got to live out hope:’ Climate orgs urge New Mexico lawmakers to pass Clear Horizons Act: at 2/5/26 5:40pm
Students from Acequia Madre Elementary in Santa Fe and the Rio Grande Charter School in Albuquerque in the Global Warming Express afterschool program wear masks depicting different New Mexican species, and chant “Remember them,” during a climate rally in the Rotunda on Feb. 5, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) A parade of children wearing hats with New Mexican animals milled through the heart of the Roundhouse Thursday, as members from climate organizations championed legislation to enshrine emissions reductions into state law. Senate Bill 18, sponsored by Senate Pro Tem Mimi Stewart (D-Albuquerque) would mandate tiered emission reductions in state law. Modeled on a 2019 executive order issued by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, the bill would allow state agencies to plan and measure the state’s progress based on meeting the following goals: 45% fewer greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 as compared to 2005 levels; 75% by 2040 and net-zero by 2050. The bill’s rules would only apply to the largest, stationary emitters producing 10,000 metric tons or more of climate pollution per year. The legislation scraped through its first committee on a 5-4 vote, and will be heard on Saturday in the Senate Taxation, Business and Transportation committee. Healthy Climate New Mexico Executive Director Shelley Mann-Lev told Source NM that she was nervous about the upcoming hearing. “But we’ve got to live out hope,” Mann-Lev said. “We’ve got to act. Our lives, the health of all beings depends on us taking action on climate change.” Representatives from the oil and gas industry, construction and large agricultural opponents of SB18 have said it threatens business and the broader New Mexico economy. Stewart cited a recent New Mexico Voices for Children study that the cost of wildfire response and flash flood recovery from disasters caused by climate change is already costing the state billions of dollars. “In this unseasonably warm winter, New Mexicans are showing up to fight for a future where our way of life doesn’t just survive, it thrives,” Stewart said. We’ve made real progress, and with the Clear Horizons Act, we’re choosing growth and opportunity that protects our land, our air, and our children that’s powered by clean energy that reflects our values and lowers costs for families.” In the rotunda, three members of the Interfaith Power and Light climate justice group ended their 320-mile pilgrimage. Over 26 days, the group walked from oil and gas country in the Permian Basin to the Roundhouse, calling for the passage of SB18 and further “courage” to address climate change. The Clear Horizons Act provides the critical framework New Mexico needs to hold polluters accountable and to protect communities from the worst impacts of climate change, said Desirée Bernard, the executive director of Interfaith Power and Light. We have walked to express active hope in the family of humanity and pray for our elected leaders to have the political courage to meet the moment.” GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, Environment & Climate Change, climate change, climate disaster, New Mexico Clear Horizons Act, Sen Pro Tem Mimi Stewart]
— NM Legislature day 17 recap: Hecklers target Las Cruces lawmaker; 4 bills signed into law: at 2/5/26 5:18pm
Right: New Mexico Dream Team President Brenda Vara, 20, and Arelie Garcia, 19, celebrate the passage of the Immigrant Safety Act, which was signed into law on Feb. 5, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)More than 500 people gathered on the south side of the Roundhouse Thursday to celebrate the signing of House Bill 9, which bans local governments from signing detention contracts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and local law enforcement from serving federal immigration warrants. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed HB9, along with three other bills Thursday. Her timing coincided with Youth Power Day, hosted by the climate justice nonprofit Semilla Project. “We didn’t get this very important piece of legislation passed into law because of one person, it’s because of you all,” Rep. Angelica Rubio (D-Las Cruces) told the crowd. The crowd answered her remarks with boisterous shouts of “whose house, our house,” and “people, power.” When another Las Cruces Democrat took the stage, though, the mood changed. Rep. Nathan Small (D-Las Cruces), who chairs the House Appropriations and Finance Committee, tried to speak about $3 million in outdoor equity grants in the budget, which could be used to expand outdoor learning and careers to address pollution. “Do you worry about what is going to happen in our mountains and our rivers?” Small asked the crowd of climate advocates. “What we have now, with the New Mexico Legislature, is money to support you guys, getting out there, doing work and making a good wage.” Members of the crowd, however, shouted “shame on you.” Jovanny Hernandez, right, confronts Rep. Nathan Small (D-Las Cruces) over his support of Project Jupiter, a massive data center complex planned for Doña Ana County. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) They weren’t shouting down the outdoor equity funding, however; rather: Small’s support of Project Jupiter, the controversial multi-billion dollar data center complex slated to be built in Doña Ana County. Jovanny Hernandez shouted and booed along with a handful of other people, and then made his way inside to confront Small in the lobby of the Roundhouse, citing concerns over its projected emissions and water use. “Yeah, we have different opinions on it,” Small told him. “But it’s going to use less water than 20 or 30 acres of pecans.” Small said he would work to develop the region’s infrastructure and require more renewable energy sources to provide power for Project Jupiter. Hernandez replied: “I hope you go to bed thinking about what you’ve done to Doña Ana County.” Governor signs 4 priority bills Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed four bills into law Thursday morning, including interstate medical compacts and the ICE detention ban. As she signed her name to each piece of legislation, she praised lawmakers from both sides of the aisle for coming together and working on these priority issues. But she made it clear that she wants to see more action before the session ends at noon on Feb. 19, particularly on medical malpractice reform and universal child care. “This early in the session, getting legislation passed is hard, even with an interim and years of work,” Lujan Grisham told a packed room of lawmakers, advocates and reporters Thursday morning. “I am proud of the Legislature. They don’t need that, but I think the public needs to know that they are getting incredible things done.” Just hours after Lujan Grisham signed the bills into law, the House of Representatives passed its 10th compact bill of the session. It’s a sprint, not a marathon The House Rural Development, Land Grants and Cultural Affairs Committee convened a couple minutes after 9 a.m. Thursday morning. On the agenda: House Bill 268, a feasibility study for a statewide land grant and acequia museum, and House Bill 288, which would direct funding to the New Mexico Historic Women Marker Program. After nearly seven minutes — less than half the time needed to listen to an Iron Butterfly song — the committee advanced both bills and adjourned for the day. “With that, that’s the end of one of the quickest, most efficient meetings,” committee Chair Rep. Linda Serrato (D-Santa Fe) said before bringing her gavel down. Students take to the Rotunda Students from Acequia Madre Elementary in Santa Fe and the Rio Grande Charter School in Albuquerque in the Global Warming Express afterschool program wear masks depicting different New Mexican species, and chant “Remember them,” during a climate rally in the Rotunda on Feb. 5, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) Looking ahead As the governor calls on lawmakers to prioritize her universal child care initiative, a measure that would only require co-pays from high-earning families under certain economic circumstances is scheduled for its first hearing. The Senate Education Committee is scheduled to discuss Senate Bill 241, the Child Care Assistance Program Act, at 9 a.m. Friday. Lawmakers will be working on the weekend, as a lengthy hearing is expected Saturday for Senate Bill 18, the Clear Horizons Act, in the Senate Tax, Business and Transportation Committee. The bill, which would mandate climate pollution reduction goals, advanced through its first committee on a 5-4 vote earlier this week.
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, 2026 New Mexico Legislative session]
— Early childhood educators urge New Mexico Senate to keep wage increase in budget: at 2/5/26 4:02pm
Alei Maxson, director of new home-visiting startup La Luz Family, urged lawmakers to preserve a $60 million allocation to the Early Childhood Education and Care Department during a rally at the Roundhouse on Feb. 5, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)Childcare workers and advocacy groups on Thursday called on New Mexico Senate lawmakers to ensure raises for early childhood education workers remain in the state budget, even as the governor’s vision of universal childcare remains a sticking point in budget negotiations. In a news conference held outside the Roundhouse’s western steps, early childcare advocates said the Legislature must invest in raises, or risk people leaving the profession for higher paying jobs with more stability. “The turnover is costly, not just for the resources for recruiting and training new staff but in disruption it causes for families who need our support,” said Alei Maxson, director of home-visiting startup La Luz Family. Advocates urged members of the Senate Finance Committee in a letter Thursday to support a $60 million allotment in HB2 for the New Mexico Early Childhood Education and Care Department. The funding pays for a program to increase wages for educators with more qualifications. Magnolia Chavez, who operates a home-licensed care center in Albuquerque for about 15 children of varied ages, said child care operators have for too long been “poorly paid and poorly valued.” “Universal childcare will only work if the educators are willing and able to remain in this field,” Chavez said in Spanish outside of the Roundhouse Thursday. “When educators do not have stability, the families don’t have it either,” she said. Child care has emerged as a top priority for Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s last session. However, the $11 billion budget bill, which advanced out of the House this week, in its current form does not fully fund the governor’s vision for free universal childcare, which she unveiled last year and which has garnered national attention. The Legislature’s budget, instead, includes co-pays in the state’s child care program for higher-earning families, which the governor opposes. “For me, universal childcare means if there’s a copay it’s not really universally applied,” Lujan Grisham said during a bill signing and news conference Thursday morning. Negotiations remain ongoing, she said. GET THE MORNING HEADLINES. SUBSCRIBE
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, early childhood, ECECD, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, House Bill 2, universal childcare]
— US Senate Republicans block attempt to sue Trump administration over Epstein files: at 2/5/26 3:47pm
Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer speaks to reporters at the U.S. Capitol on June 17, 2025. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)WASHINGTON — Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic proposal Thursday to sue the Trump administration over allegations that it did not fully release the Epstein files, as mandated under a law unanimously approved by senators and signed by the president nearly three months ago. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., asked for unanimous consent on a resolution compelling the Republican-led Senate to challenge President Donald Trump in court to release more records from the government’s investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who died in 2019 awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges. Department of Justice Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump’s former personal defense attorney, said Jan. 30 that the department had finished complying with the new law after a final release of 3 million pages, containing 2,000 videos and 180,000 images. In total, the department released about 3.5 million records since the law’s passage. The latest tranche revealed a global network of numerous men in powerful positions in communication with Epstein. Late and redacted The legal deadline to release the files was Dec. 19. “Fifty days past the deadline, at best, according to the Department of Justices own admissions, maybe half of all the available Epstein files have been released,” Schumer said on the floor Thursday morning. Schumer said that among the records released, many have been “redacted to an absurd degree.” “This is not what the law requires. This is a mockery of the truth and an insult to the survivors. What makes this all the more sickening is that in over 1,000 instances, the Justice Department failed to follow the law and leaked the identities of over 100 victims. But do you know who the Justice Department did seem to protect? Epsteins co-conspirators,” Schumer continued. The minority leader entered into the congressional record a letter he brought along from roughly 20 Epstein victims decrying the “reckless and dangerous” release of victims’ identities. Senate Majority Whip John Barrasso, R-Wyo., blocked the resolution, chalking it up as “another reckless political stunt designed to distract Americans from Democrats’ dangerous plan to shut down the Department of Homeland Security.” Barrasso was referring to negotiations underway to fund DHS. Democrats have demanded changes to immigration enforcement tactics after two U.S. citizens were fatally shot by federal agents in Minneapolis, and numerous other U.S. citizens were injured by federal agents during Trump’s surge into blue states. Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., criticized Barrasso’s objection on the floor, calling it “morally wrong.” The White House did not respond to a request for comment. A DOJ official told States Newsroom in an email that the resolution presented “a tired narrative.” “Just because you wish something to be true, doesn’t mean it is. This Department produced more than 3.5 million pages in compliance with the law and, in full transparency, has disclosed to the public and to Congress what items were not responsive. I assume all members of Congress read the actual language before voting on it, but if not, our press release and letter to Congress clearly spells this out,” the official wrote, including a link to the department’s Jan. 30 press release. ‘Hunger or thirst for information’ Blanche told reporters on Jan. 30, “There’s a hunger or a thirst for information that I do not think will be satisfied by the review of these documents. There’s nothing I can do about that.” He said no information uncovered in the files warranted new prosecutions. The new law, dubbed by lawmakers as the Epstein Files Transparency Act, required the DOJ to make publicly available “all unclassified records, documents, communications, and investigative materials in DOJ’s possession that relate to the investigation and prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein,” including materials related to Epstein’s accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell. Epstein avoided federal charges in 2008 when he pleaded guilty to Florida state prostitution charges, including for the solicitation of a minor. A 2007 draft of a federal indictment that laid out more robust charges was among the files released by the DOJ on Jan. 30.
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics]
— Trump Education Department bolsters protections for prayer in schools: at 2/5/26 3:46pm
President Donald Trump gives a speech at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 21, 2026. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Education reinforced the right to prayer in public schools in guidance issued Thursday. Under the guidance to state and local education agencies, students, teachers and school officials have “a right to pray in school as an expression of individual faith, as long as they’re not doing so on behalf of the school,” the department said. President Donald Trump’s administration has sought to protect religious liberty in public schools and beyond, and a growing number of GOP state legislators have tried to infuse Christianity in public education. Trump announced the guidance during remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, calling the move a “big deal.” The president predicted that Democrats would sue over the guidance, but said he was confident his administration would win any legal challenge. The guidance also makes clear that “public schools may not sponsor prayer nor coerce or pressure students to pray.” In 1962, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school-sponsored prayer in public schools violates the Constitution. The new guidance calls on school officials to “allow the individuals who make up a public school community to act and speak in accordance with their faith, provided they do not invade the rights of others, the school does not itself participate in religious action or speech as an institution, and the school does not favor secular over religious views or one religious view over another.” The guidance leans on a handful of recent Supreme Court rulings surrounding religious expression and religious freedom in public schools, such as Kennedy v. Bremerton School District, which found that the actions of a Washington state high school football coach who prayed at the 50-yard line after games were constitutionally protected. The Education Department is required by law to periodically reissue guidance on prayer in schools, according to the department. Trump had previewed Thursday’s guidance while speaking in September 2025 at a Religious Liberty Commission hearing. The president established that commission in May 2025 in an effort to “safeguard and promote America’s founding principle of religious freedom.” Education Secretary Linda McMahon said the administration is “proud to stand with students, parents, and faculty who wish to exercise their First Amendment rights in schools across our great nation,” in a statement alongside the announcement. “Our Constitution safeguards the free exercise of religion as one of the guiding principles of our republic, and we will vigorously protect that right in America’s public schools,” she said.
[Category: DC Bureau]
— In the next decade, states will see a surge in obesity: at 2/5/26 3:46pm
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. promotes "real food" at a rally in Harrisburg, Penn., last month. Over the next decade, obesity rates across the nation could surge to close to half of U.S. adults, a new study says. (Photo by Whitney Downard/Pennsylvania Capital-Star)Over the next decade, obesity rates across the nation could surge to close to half of U.S. adults, a new study published in the medical journal JAMA estimates. Researchers at the University of Washington conducted the analysis using body mass index data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and self-reported weight data from a national survey of adults ages 20 and older. They examined the 2022 rates and created estimates for 2035 based on current trends. The researchers also looked at race, ethnicity and state-level data, finding wide disparities across states and racial groups. About a fifth of U.S. adults were living with obesity in 1990. By 2022, the percentage increased to nearly 43%. Obesity was more prevalent in states in the Midwest and South. If current trends continue, about 47% of U.S. adults will be living with obesity by 2035, according to the researchers. Obesity rates are projected to increase among Americans of all ages and racial groups. In 2022, non-Hispanic Black women had the highest age-standardized obesity rate, at about 57%, followed by Hispanic women at 49%. Hispanic males, non-Hispanic white males and females, and non-Hispanic Black males had similar rates, ranging from about 40% to nearly 43%. The study comes amid exploding demand for weight-loss drugs, and as U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. continues to push his Make America Healthy Again campaign. HHS and the U.S. Department of Agriculture last month made changes to the federal food pyramid, placing a greater emphasis on animal protein, dairy and fats. Like the previous guidelines, the new pyramid discourages the consumption of processed foods, which can cause weight gain. Despite disparities between men and women and between racial groups, HHS says its nutrition strategy moves away from the “health equity” focus of the Biden administration, in favor of making “the health of all Americans the primary goal.” For Hispanic people, obesity rates were generally higher in states in the Midwest and the South in 2022, a pattern that is expected to continue through 2035. In 2022, the obesity rate for Hispanic women was highest in Oklahoma, at about 54%. For Hispanic men, the rate was highest in Indiana, at roughly 47%. In 2035, Indiana is projected to have the highest rate of obesity among Hispanic men at about 54%, while the highest rate for Hispanic women, nearly 60%, is expected to be in South Dakota. The Midwest and South also had high rates of obesity for non-Hispanic white men and women. In 2022, West Virginia had the highest obesity rates for white men and women — about 47% and 49%, respectively. In 2022, obesity rates for white men and women were lowest in the District of Columbia, at roughly 24% for men and 26% for women. Among Black women, obesity rates were over 50% for all states, except Hawaii, in 2022. That pattern is expected to continue through 2035. Black men have lower obesity rates than Black women across all states. In 2022, the highest obesity rate for Black men was in Oklahoma, at about 44%. That rate projected to rise to 49% in 2035. “While no locations were predicted to have decreases in obesity prevalence between 2022 and 2035, there were many with small increases over this time,” the authors wrote. They pointed to Mississippi, where Black women had the highest obesity rates between 1990 and 2022, but are projected to see one of the smallest changes — an increase of about 1.8% — by 2035. “Predictions in states with historically high levels of obesity, such as Mississippi, suggest that the prevalence of obesity may be plateauing in some locations,” the researchers wrote. Stateline reporter Nada Hassanein can be reached at nhassanein@stateline.org. This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Source New Mexico, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
[Category: Health]
— New Mexico governor signs medical compacts, Immigrant Safety Act, road bonds into law: at 2/5/26 12:53pm
New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham on Feb. 5, 2026, signed legislation involving interstate medical compacts, ICE detention and road construction projects into law. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM)New Mexico Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed four bills relating to interstate licensed professional compacts, ICE detention and road construction projects into law Thursday morning while surrounded by lawmakers from both political parties. She signed Senate Bill 1 and House Bill 50, the Interstate Medical Licensure Compact and Social Work Licensure Interstate Compact, which will make it easier for out-of-state physicians and social workers to move to and practice in New Mexico. She also signed House Bill 9, the Immigrant Safety Act, which prohibits local governments across the state from signing detention contracts with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — though Torrance County officials notably renewed their contract after the bill passed and before the governor signed it. And she signed Senate Bill 2, which will authorize $1.5 billion in bonds for road construction projects across the state. “This early in the session, getting legislation passed is hard, even with an interim and years of work,” Lujan Grisham said at the signing. “I am proud of the Legislature. They don’t need that, but I think the public needs to know that they are getting incredible things done.” Several lawmakers who worked on the signed legislation spoke alongside the governor to praise one another for their bipartisan, swift action. “Certainly, the governor and I agree on a lot of things. We also disagree on a lot of things,” Senate Minority Leader Bill Sharer (R-Farmington) said. “But in this particular case when we’re talking about compacts, absolutely we’re on the same team.” Sharer’s Republican colleagues have been critical of House Bill 9, one of the other bills Lujan Grisham signed into law Thursday morning. Lujan Grisham indicated that she was receptive to the criticism that HB9 could inadvertently put people in rural New Mexico counties out of work should detention centers close. To that end, she said, the House’s budget proposal contains $6 million to support workforce development in Torrance, Cibola and Otero counties, where the state’s three immigrant detention centers are located. But it remained clear that there will be continued, lengthy negotiations over the priority bills that have not yet made their way to the governor’s desk. Lujan Grisham has identified medical malpractice reform and universal child care, in particular, as efforts she wants to sign into law before the end of her second and final term. Minority Floor Leader Rep. Gail Armstrong (R-Magdalena) has previously said that without malpractice reform, the interstate medical compact gives New Mexico doctors “a full tank of gas to be able to go to other states.” Supporters of both the compacts and malpractice reform say they go hand-in-hand to address New Mexico’s health care worker shortage. State law currently lacks caps on punitive damages that can be awarded at trial in a malpractice case; House Bill 99 would not only implement a cap for providers and locally owned hospitals, but it would also raise the standard of proof needed for a jury to award punitive damages. A recent W.K. Kellogg Foundation study on New Mexico’s medical workforce shortage found that roughly one in three New Mexicans have had a health care provider leave the state or retire in the last two years. Similarly, one-third of New Mexicans have turned to emergency room care twice or more in the last year because they couldn’t get an appointment with a provider. Lujan Grisham expressed reservations about an “unfriendly amendment” — meaning the bill’s sponsor opposes it — that would put a cap on punitive damages for everyone except corporate-owned hospitals. “The amendment I’m a little concerned about. But it’s getting the proper debate,” Lujan Grisham told reporters Thursday. “I think unlimited liability or punitives in any context in medical malpractice is an unworkable situation for New Mexico. I don’t think it’s enough to turn the tide.” Senate Majority Leader Peter Wirth (D-Santa Fe) added that the medical malpractice bill meaningfully addresses many other critical issues by protecting providers who work at those corporate-owned hospitals and by making punitive damages harder to come by, and added that he thinks negotiations are “90%” done. Lujan Grisham was quick to interject. “I don’t know if I would say it’s 90%,” she said. “But this is incredibly valuable and we’re really working hard to demonstrate that we can figure out how to solve complex problems in the state of New Mexico.” Similarly, the governor made her reservations known about the ongoing debate over her universal child care initiative. Late last year, she unveiled a universal no-cost program for all New Mexicans to enroll their kids in child care. The House of Representatives on Wednesday passed an $11 billion budget proposal, though, that would implement co-pays for higher-earning families. Unevenly requiring payments from families is not truly “universal,” Lujan Grisham said. Sen. George Muñoz (D-Gallup) looks on while Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signs four new bills into law on Feb. 5, 2026. (Danielle Prokop/Source NM) Sen. George Muñoz (D-Gallup) recently introduced Senate Bill 241, the Child Care Assistance Program Act, which would call for co-pays only under specific economic circumstances. “Just because you’re a millionaire doesn’t mean you can’t participate,” he told reporters Thursday. “You pay taxes, too.” The governor, for her part, said she thinks there’s still time for her initiative to come together as planned. When her office unveiled its executive budget recommendation in December, it called for an additional $160.6 million to adequately fund the initiative. “I’m feeling good — I don’t want to jinx it — about fully funding universal child care,” she said.
[Category: 2026 New Mexico Legislative Session, 2026 New Mexico Legislative session]
— Immigration detention passed 70,000 in January: at 2/5/26 10:28am
A demonstrator waves a red cloth as hundreds gather after ICE agent Jonathan Ross shot and killed Renee Good through her car window Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026 near Portland Avenue and 34th Street. (Photo by Nicole Neri/Minnesota Reformer)Despite the high-profile U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement actions in Minnesota, ICE arrests were down slightly in January compared to December, according to new data. Immigrant detention nationwide also reached a new high in January, and a growing percentage — nearly three-quarters — of people in detention have no criminal convictions. ICE arrested 36,579 people in January compared with December (37,842); the numbers haven’t changed much since October (36,621), according to new estimates from a Syracuse University professor. The number of people in immigration detention reached 70,766 as of Jan. 24, a new high, according to a different report by Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, also at Syracuse University. The number in detention has gone up steadily from about 40,000 at the start of the second Trump administration, and the latest number is the largest since the organization, known as TRAC, began tracking immigrant detention in 2019. Of those detainees 74.2%, or 52,504, had no criminal convictions, up from 70.4% in June. “Since the summer, nearly all of the growth in ICE detention has come from people without criminal convictions or charges — an area of tremendous sustained growth that contradicts the Trump administration’s narrative that they are focused on the worst of the worst,” Austin Kocher, a research assistant professor at Syracuse University who researches immigration enforcement, wrote in a substack posting. Kocher is a former researcher for TRAC but is no longer associated with the organization and created estimates of monthly arrests based on detention check-ins. Detention facilities in Texas had the largest number of detainees, 18,684, followed by Louisiana (8,207), California (6,422), Florida (5,187) and Georgia (4,178) as of Jan. 24. Stateline reporter Tim Henderson can be reached at thenderson@stateline.org. This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Source New Mexico, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
[Category: Criminal Justice, Immigration]
— In setback for Trump, Congress in spending law rejects call to axe Education Department: at 2/5/26 10:28am
The funding package President Donald Trump signed Feb. 3, 2026, includes $79 billion for the U.S. Education Department, representing a rejection by Congress of the president's plan to close the department. (Photo by kali9/Getty Images)WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s attempts to dramatically slash funding for the U.S. Department of Education amid a broader push to dismantle the agency hit a major roadblock this week in the form of bipartisan approval of a spending law that gives the department a small raise. The president signed a measure that funds the department at $79 billion this fiscal year — roughly $217 million more than the agency’s fiscal year 2025 funding levels and a whopping $12 billion above what Trump wanted. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington state, the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, wrote in a social media post after the signing that the law was a direct rebuke of several Trump priorities, including eliminating the department. “Our funding bills send a message to Trump,” she wrote. “Congress will NOT abolish the Department of Education.” The measure also rejects efforts to dramatically reduce or fully slash funding for a host of programs administered by the department for low-income and disadvantaged students. Trump and his administration have sought over the past year to take an axe to the 46-year-old agency as part of a quest to send education “back to the states.” Much of the funding and oversight of schools already occurs at the state and local levels. Those dismantling efforts included six interagency agreements with four other departments in November that would shift several Education responsibilities to those Cabinet-level agencies. The department also saw mass layoffs initiated in March 2025 and a plan to dramatically downsize the agency ordered that same month — efforts that the U.S. Supreme Court temporarily greenlit in July. The spending package also holds full-year funding for the departments of Defense, Labor, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, Transportation, State and Treasury. The measure includes a two-week stopgap measure for the Department of Homeland Security. ‘Inefficiencies’ The measure does not offer ironclad language to prevent the outsourcing of the Education Department’s responsibilities to other agencies — despite efforts from Senate Democrats to block such transfers. However, in a joint explanatory statement alongside the measure, lawmakers expressed alarm over the “assignment of such programmatic responsibilities to agencies that do not have experience, expertise, or capacity to carry out these programs and activities and lack developed relationships and communications with relevant stakeholders, including States.” Lawmakers added they were “concerned that fragmenting responsibilities for education programs across multiple agencies will create inefficiencies, result in additional costs to the American taxpayer, and cause delays and administrative challenges in Federal funding reaching States, school districts, and schools.” Due to those concerns, the funding measure directs the Education Department and the agencies that are part of the transfers to provide biweekly briefings to lawmakers on the implementation of any interagency agreements. The briefings are supposed to include information on “staffing transfers, implementation costs, metrics on the delivery of services” and the “availability of technical support for programs to grantees,” among other matters. The Education Department clarified when announcing the interagency agreements in November with the departments of Labor, Interior, Health and Human Services and State that it would “maintain all statutory responsibilities and will continue its oversight of these programs.” ‘Necessary’ staffing levels The funding agreement also mandates that the department “support staffing levels necessary to fulfill its statutory responsibilities including carrying out programs, projects, and activities funded in (the law) in a timely manner.” The department took heat last summer when it froze $6.8 billion in funds for K-12 schools and informed states just a day before the money is typically sent out. The funds were eventually unfrozen, following bipartisan pushback in Congress. Pell Grant spared The measure also maintains the total maximum annual award for the Pell Grant from the prior fiscal year at $7,395, according to a summary from Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee. The government subsidy helps low-income students pay for college. Trump’s budget request called for cutting nearly $1,700 from the maximum award for the 2026-2027 award year, a proposal that stoked alarm last year from leading House and Senate appropriators in both parties overseeing Education Department funding. Funding levels maintained for TRIO, GEAR UP The administration also called for defunding the Federal TRIO programs and the Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, or GEAR UP, in fiscal 2026 — a move rejected in the measure. The Federal TRIO Programs include federal outreach and student services programs to help support students who come from disadvantaged backgrounds, and GEAR UP aims to prepare low-income students for college. Appropriators maintained funding for the programs at fiscal 2025 levels — with $1.191 billion for TRIO and $388 million for GEAR UP, per the Senate Democrats’ summary. The administration also sought to axe funding for the Child Care Access Means Parents in School Program, which, according to the Education Department, “supports the participation of low-income parents in postsecondary education through the provision of campus-based child care services.” Instead, the measure allocates $75 million for the program. The Education Department did not respond to a request for comment on the funding package. The administration expressed its support for the entire, multi-bill package, in a Jan. 29 statement of administration policy that barely mentioned the education provisions.
[Category: DC Bureau, Education, Gov & Politics]
— New Mexico governor preparing FEMA lawsuit over outstanding $445M wildfire claim: at 2/5/26 6:11am
A top New Mexico disaster response official told Source NM that she no longer believes the state will receive $445 million in compensation from the Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fire Claims Office, including $70M for a Mora reforestation center pictured above in April of 2024. (Patrick Lohmann/Source NM)Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham intends to pursue a lawsuit against the Federal Emergency Management Agency for millions in outstanding claims from the state connected to the 2022 Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fire. The governor’s Communication Director Michael Coleman told Source NM Wednesday that the governor’s lawyer is drafting a complaint and seeking outside counsel for the suit against FEMA, which oversees a New Mexico claims office administering billions in compensation. “The federal government started a catastrophic fire in northern New Mexico and we intend to collect for the damage,” Coleman said in a statement. Following the wildfire, which resulted from botched prescribed burns by the U.S. Forest Service, Congress created a $5.45 billion compensation fund for the fire’s victims: individuals, businesses and governments. The claims office has thus far paid out roughly $3.3 billion, according to a Facebook post from the office Wednesday. However, New Mexico Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Deputy Secretary Ali Rye told Source NM this week she believes the fund is running out of money, in part because in recent months, officials from the claims office stopped providing regular financial updates during scheduled meetings. Rye’s agency submitted a $445 million claim in December of 2024 on behalf of 20 state agencies — from health to tourism. The state also hoped to use some of the funding for future disaster response. Rye said the state’s claim has not moved at all since then. “In my gut, I don’t think we’re getting anything,” she said. A claims office spokesperson said Wednesday that Source’s questions about Rye’s comments and the status of funds were “in process,” but did not provide answers as of publication time. While Rye stressed that individuals and households still waiting for compensation for losses in the wildfire remain her biggest concern, she said the state’s claim would fund important services, both to people and landscapes the wildfire affected. “Youre going to see a lot of people who didnt get served,” she said, if the office doesn’t pay the state’s claim. “Youre going to see a lot of government municipalities struggling.” The biggest line item in the state’s claim is $266 million to the state Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department for reforestation of tens of thousands of acres of forest the fire damaged. Key to that effort is a reforestation center in Mora, which expanded in 2024 with the expectation it would receive $70 million from the claims office to help it grow 390 million native seedlings that are drought-resistant and can survive in the burn scar. “I cant go to Home Depot and buy hundreds of trees and expect them all to survive,” Rye said. “We needed that reforestation center.” In addition to the reforestation center, the New Mexico Environment Department expected more than $100 million in compensation for water well testing in the burn scar over the next decade. The need for testing has sharply increased in recent months, due to the discovery of heavy metal contamination at several dozen private wells in the burn scar. Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Fire victims grapple with latest crisis Rye’s concerns come amid heightened outrage among wildfire victims and public officials over the claims office and its director, Jay Mitchell, who has led the office since April 2024. Source New Mexico revealed last week that Mitchell accepted a six-figure payment from the claims office for smoke damage at his Angel Fire home far from the wildfire perimeter. Rye said the ongoing costs for the wildfire and her recent experience at the burn scar have left her “disheartened,” especially after her early optimism that the multi-billion-dollar fund would make people whole from the wildfire. “I’d hoped for more,” she said.
[Category: Gov & Politics, ali rye, Department of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon Claims Office, Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon fire, jay mitchell]
— With electricity bills rising, some states consider new data center laws: at 2/5/26 6:11am
An Amazon Web Services data center is shown situated near single-family homes in Stone Ridge, Va., in 2024. As Americans grow increasingly frustrated over their electricity bills, states are trying to keep the nation’s growing number of data centers from causing higher energy costs for consumers. (Photo by Nathan Howard/Getty Images)As Americans grow increasingly frustrated over their electricity bills, states are trying to keep the nation’s growing number of data centers from causing higher energy costs for consumers. For years, many states competed aggressively to land data centers, sprawling campuses full of the computer servers that store and transmit the data behind apps and websites. But many officials are now scrutinizing how those power-hungry projects might affect the electric bills of households, small businesses and other industries. Oregon last year became one of the first states to enact a law requiring utilities to charge data centers different electric prices than other industries because of how they drive up the cost of energy production and transmission. “We are now making data centers pay a higher rate commensurate with the amount of energy theyre sucking out of the system,” said Oregon state Rep. Tom Andersen, a Democrat. Republican and Democratic leaders in at least a dozen states have targeted data centers with separate, higher electric rates to protect other customers. States also are requiring long-term commitments and financial guarantees through collateral before greenlighting infrastructure investments for new data center projects. But lawmakers acknowledge that numerous factors affect energy prices, so targeting data center-specific costs can be complicated. An increasingly digital world and the rise of energy-intensive artificial intelligence has led to major expansion of data centers: Consultant McKinsey Company expects companies to spend nearly $7 trillion worldwide on data centers by 2030. But the industry is facing growing scrutiny, from neighbors who don’t want to live near the massive server farms and from residents worried about how data centers will affect their own swelling utility bills. Delaware legislation that would charge data centers higher rates advanced out of committee last week. On Tuesday, a Florida state Senate committee approved a bill that would create new rate structures for data centers. In Oklahoma, a Republican state senator has proposed a moratorium on new data centers until late 2029, allowing the state to study how data centers affect utility rates, the environment and property values. Separate legislation from state Rep. Brad Boles will seek to protect other ratepayers from the costs of data centers. Boles, the Republican chair of the state Energy and Natural Resources Oversight Committee, said his in-the-works measure would ensure data centers pay their fair share. Boles told Stateline that his constituents are increasingly worried about data centers, with a dozen potential major ones proposed across the state. “Were trying to ensure that those data centers pay for their own infrastructure and we dont shift that cost or burden to everyday Oklahomans,” he said. In Oregon, Andersen’s legislation created a new rate structure for data centers with long-term contracts and required regulators to separate the costs of those facilities from other ratepayers. But consumer advocates have already accused the state’s largest utility of trying to skirt the new law by making residential customers pay part of the long-term cost of supplying large data centers in a pending rate case. Andersen, a member of the state House Committee on Climate, Energy and Environment, said the new rate structure is unlikely to immediately lower consumer bills. Rather, it aims to curb future increases as data centers require more power generation and transmission. “Were not going to change the rates that are being currently paid by the ratepayers and the users of the electricity,” he said. “Its just going to stop future raises.” The data center boom Rising utility bills continue to outpace inflation, sparking anger from consumers and more scrutiny from state regulators, governors and lawmakers. The boom of data centers is frequently cited as a prime reason for rising electricity prices, as their operation requires more power generation, transmission and distribution upgrades. A Bloomberg News analysis in September found wholesale electricity costs as much as 267% more for a single month than it did five years ago in areas with significant data center activity. Data center companies say they aren’t the only reason prices are rising. “Its inaccurate to draw a clear line between large load customers like data centers coming online and increases in prices. Its just not that simple,” said Lucas Fykes, senior director of energy policy and regulatory counsel at the Data Center Coalition, a trade group representing data center owners and users, including Amazon, Meta and Visa. He said many factors have contributed to higher electricity prices, including extreme weather events and the nation’s aging electric grid. Fykes said his organization opposes rate structures that treat data centers differently from other large electric users such as industrial sites. The organization is working with regulators as states increasingly implement practices to ensure residents and small businesses aren’t on the hook for big energy investments if major projects including data centers don’t come to fruition. Fykes said the country is likely just in the beginning innings” of a longer ramp-up in technology and power needs. “We are also in a global race to build out data centers, to support AI, to support cloud infrastructure,” he said. “Its important to make sure that we maintain those assets here in the United States.” That can pose competing interests for political leaders, including mayors, who have pushed hard to land investments from tech companies. “We want to be leaders in AI, but we don’t want the infrastructure needed to support it,” said Rusty Paul, the mayor of Sandy Springs, Georgia, in the Atlanta metro area. He was among several mayors addressing the issue of data centers at last months winter meeting of the United States Conference of Mayors in Washington, D.C. On a data center panel, Paul acknowledged the effect of Georgia’s tax incentives for data centers: “They’re just popping up everywhere,” he said. But utilities and regulators are also making long overdue grid upgrades that aren’t tied to data centers, he said. “The cost of electricity is going up for everybody — and it’s not all related to data centers,” he said. A bipartisan push The Georgia Public Service Commission last year created new rules that officials said would protect ratepayers from data center costs. In addition to covering costs of power consumed at their facilities, data centers would have to fund the costs incurred by upstream generation, transmission and distribution, the regulator said. But lawmakers aren’t convinced those steps went far enough. State Sen. Chuck Hufstetler, a Republican, is again pushing legislation that would solidify the regulator’s rules into law. His bill would prohibit utilities from passing along the fuel, generation or transmission costs of data centers to other customers. He told Stateline that the regulators rules need to be codified into law so they can’t be weakened later. Hufstetler said rising utility bills are among the biggest issues facing his constituents. High prices played a key role in November’s election, when Democrats flipped two seats on the state’s Public Service Commission board — the first time Democrats won statewide constitutional office in nearly two decades. “I saw people with MAGA hats going into the election polling places that were saying, ‘Im not voting for those guys that raised my rates,’” Hufstetler said, referring to the Republican incumbents who lost. Hufstetler said the bill, which passed out of committee last year, has already gained major bipartisan support in the Senate, where it is sponsored by multiple Republicans and Democrats. “This is very bipartisan,” he said. “We have all heard from our people around the state of Georgia.” The Georgia Public Service Commission agrees in principle with the legislation, said agency spokesperson Tom Krause. But he said the regulator worries about losing flexibility if its rules are written into law. “Not just this bill, but whenever the legislature codifies a rule that we put in place, we get a little nervous because it can tie our hands in special circumstances,” he said. A complex challenge As part of implementing a law enacted last year, Marylands utility regulator is weighing a new rate structure for data centers and other large load users. Proposed regulations would require certain preapproval analysis for heavy power users, a separate rate tariff for data centers and collateral to ensure other ratepayers don’t end up paying for major investments if projects do not come to fruition. Maryland’s Office of People’s Counsel, an independent agency representing residential utility users, said the proposed changes meet statutory requirements but could do more to protect consumers. In a news release last month, Maryland People’s Counsel David S. Lapp said residents are already facing higher costs from data centers from outside the state. “While we push for better federal rules to address those costs, Maryland has the power—and customers a clear need—to make sure data centers within Maryland take on every cost that they impose on residential customers,” Lapp said. Democratic Gov. Wes Moore recently joined 12 other governors and the Trump administration in urging the regional grid operator, PJM Interconnection, to shield residents and businesses from the infrastructure costs from data centers. Maryland state Del. Lorig Charkoudian, a Democrat, said the grid operator has for years failed residents in the 13 states plus the District of Columbia that it serves. By delaying renewable energy projects, she said, PJM has kept older, more expensive power plants online, driving up prices as data centers increase demand. PJM’s board last month rolled out a new data center plan that it said would improve demand forecasting, accelerate the addition of new generation projects and give states a larger role. The best time to fix this was five years ago. The next best time is right this minute, because it’s only going to get worse. – Maryland Democratic state Del. Lorig Charkoudian Charkoudian said states and utilities struggle to determine just how much power is needed. Data center users shop around for sites, which can cause wildly inaccurate forecasts of just how much power a utility will need. “It actually has a very concrete financial impact on ratepayers,” she told Stateline. “And so thats why one of the things that really could make a difference for ratepayers is if we actually had an accurate count of how much were getting online.” While some of those challenges lie outside the realm of state control, Charkoudian said there are things the state can do, including the new rate structure for larger users. She’s crafting a bill encouraging data centers to curtail their power usage during peak periods, such as hot days, when the electrical system is taxed by heavy usage of air conditioners, Maryland Matters reported. Charkoudian said adding solar generation and storage are low-cost ways to respond quickly to demand. And states can avoid the need for more generation by doubling down on energy efficiency programs that lower demand and also consumer costs. “The best time to fix this was five years ago,” she said. “The next best time is right this minute, because its only going to get worse.” Stateline reporter Robbie Sequeira contributed to this story. Stateline reporter Kevin Hardy can be reached at khardy@stateline.org. This story was originally produced by Stateline, which is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network which includes Source New Mexico, and is supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity.
[Category: Economy]
— First Amendment free speech rights debated in Sen. Mark Kelly’s illegal orders case: at 2/4/26 11:10am
Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly outside the District of Columbia federal courthouse where his lawsuit against the Department of Defense was heard on Feb. 3, 2026. (Photo by Jennifer Shutt/States Newsroom)WASHINGTON — The federal district court judge overseeing the lawsuit Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly filed against the Department of Defense said during a Tuesday hearing he expects to issue a ruling before Feb. 11. Kelly has asked the judge to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the Pentagon from demoting his rank as a retired Navy captain for appearing in a video where he and other members of Congress reminded members of the military they do not need to follow illegal orders. Senior Judge Richard J. Leon of the District of Columbia District Court said toward the beginning of the one-hour hearing that he planned to issue his decision “as quickly as possible” and told the lawyers that he didn’t “want to get too lost in the weeds” of the case at this earlier stage. Instead, he asked several questions about First Amendment rights in general, what protections a lawmaker holds, and whether the Trump administration was trying to expand previous court decisions regarding the military justice system to retirees. Leon was nominated by former President George W. Bush. Kelly’s lawyers see a ‘First Amendment violation’ Benjamin Mizer, one of the lawyers on Kelly’s team, said “a lot about this case is unprecedented,” and urged the judge to reject the Department of Defense’s assertion that it has the legal right to demote any retired military member if they say something critical of its actions. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s censure letter and efforts to demote Kelly, he said, represented a “clear First Amendment violation.” “Secretary Hegseth demonstrated bias and that he is not a decision maker who has kept an open mind,” Mizer said. Mizer also said that all of the cases the Trump administration had cited in briefs to the judge addressed active duty service members, not retired members of the military. He contended that the federal district court does have jurisdiction to decide this case since it addresses constitutional claims. Trump administration battles back John Bailey, the Justice Department attorney representing the Defense Department in the case, said that there is “at least a military clause to the First Amendment.” Leon interjected to ask Bailey if it wasn’t “a bit of a stretch” to ask him to expand previous court rulings about active duty service members to cover retired members, like Kelly. “You’re asking me to do something the Supreme Court and D.C. Circuit haven’t done,” Leon said. Bailey also contended that Kelly should have exhausted administrative avenues within the Department of Defense to contest Hegeth’s move to add a censure letter to his file and begin the process of demoting his retirement rank and pay. Leon also questioned how any retired member of the military who is later elected as a member of Congress, especially one that sits on the Armed Services Committee, like Kelly does, could challenge any actions taken by the Defense Department. Bailey said that Congress has determined that certain retired military members are still subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Later in the hearing, Bailey conceded that there are “perhaps a few unique First Amendment” aspects to the case, but said one important aspect is that Kelly hasn’t stopped speaking out against Trump administration policies he disagrees with, meaning there hasn’t been any “chill’ of his First Amendment rights. Leon said it may not be just Kelly who feels a chilling effect but also other military retirees who decide not to question Defense Department actions over concerns they may experience the same demotion Kelly faces. Leon wrapped up the hearing saying he would decide whether to grant Kelly a preliminary injunction in the “very near future … so it can be appealed.” Kelly cites freedom of speech for military retirees Kelly, who attended the hearing, said afterward the case is not just about his constitutional rights but the rights of “millions of retired service members.” Theres nothing more fundamental to our democracy than the freedom of speech and the freedom to speak out about our government, and thats what Im fighting for, Kelly said. I appreciate the judge’s quick and careful consideration in this case, given what is at stake here. Kelly rebuked Hegseth for trying to punish him for telling members of the military they didn’t need to follow illegal orders. “Secretary Hegseth censured me and is now trying to demote me for things that I said and for doing my job as a United States senator, Kelly said. And this isnt happening in isolation. Since taking office, this administration has repeatedly gone after First Amendment rights of many Americans. Thats not how we do things here in the United States.
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics]
— Suspect in deadly shooting of guard member pleads not guilty amid death penalty discussion: at 2/4/26 11:10am
Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom’s casket is displayed at a funeral home in her hometown of Webster Springs, West Virginia, on Dec. 5, 2025. (Photo courtesy of the U.S. Department of Defense)WASHINGTON — Department of Justice attorneys said during a Wednesday hearing in federal court that a final decision will be made by May as to what kind of death penalty charges could be pursued for the suspect accused of shooting two West Virginia National Guard members in the nation’s capital, killing one and seriously wounding the other. The accused, 29-year-old Rahmanullah Lakanwal, appeared before U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta for an arraignment hearing, where he pleaded not guilty to all nine federal charges. His next court hearing is May 6 in the District Court for the District of Columbia, where it was moved from the local court. Attorney General Pam Bondi had said shortly after the incident in an interview with Fox News that DOJ would seek the death penalty if either guard member died of their injuries. Thanksgiving eve shooting blocks from White House The shooting in Washington, D.C., took place on the eve of the Thanksgiving holiday, blocks away from the White House. U.S. Army Spc. Sarah Beckstrom, 20, died as a result of her injuries, and U.S. Air Force Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe, 24, was severely wounded but recovered. A U.S. marshal officer pushed Lakanwal into the courtroom. He is using a wheelchair because he was also shot in the Nov. 26 shooting. Lakanwal, an Afghan national who entered the United States in September 2021, was later granted asylum. The hearing was somewhat delayed because Lakanwal could not hear his translator in his headphones. Charges against Lakanwal After the shooting, FBI Director Kash Patel, a Metropolitan Police Department leader and Mayor Muriel Bowser said the shooting was “targeted.” In initial charges from December, officials alleged that Lakanwal drove from his residence in Washington state to the district. He is charged with first-degree murder while armed and assault with intent to kill while armed. He is also charged with transportation of a firearm and ammunition with the intent to commit a felony; four counts of possession of a firearm during a crime of violence; and two counts of assault with the intent to kill Beckstrom and Wolfe were part of the 2,000 troops stationed in the district since last August, after President Donald Trump declared a “crime emergency.” The White House has said National Guard members will remain in the district until the end of the year.
[Category: DC Bureau, Gov & Politics, Immigration]

As of 2/6/26 6:33pm. Last new 2/6/26 6:01pm.

First feed in category: Source NM