The failure of govern­ment to secure our border is the number one issue for my constituents. They want us to stop the tidal wave of illegal immigration and illicit drugs into our coun­try. Most counts have the number of new “undocu­mented” arrivals at over 8 million since President Biden took office. While most immigrants are not dangerous; human traf­fickers, drug cartels and terrorists are also taking advantage of our leaders’ failure to secure the border. We have allowed some of the world’s most danger­ous people and 27 tons of fentanyl to come into our communities over the last four years.

Combine the blatant dis­regard of our immigration laws with New Mexico’s catch and release policies, and we have a recipe for disaster. Once the prevail­ing view of society is that the rule of law is mean­ingless, our society will quickly come unraveled. “Progressive” Democrats’ soft on crime and open border policies are a dere­liction of duty to tax-pay­ing, law-abiding citizens!

I often get asked what the state of New Mexico can do to stop the flood of dangerous drugs and dangerous people into our country. Simple – We must admit that we have a problem and then refuse to ignore it. While the Fed­eral Government has the primary responsibility of securing our border, the State of New Mexico isn’t free of responsibility when it comes to protecting New Mexicans from the ongo­ing border crisis. In fact, I believe we have waited long enough for Washing­ton to address this threat and it’s time that we take action.

First, we should require law enforcement officials to determine the immigra­tion status of anyone they arrest for criminal activity and mandate that law en­forcement agencies report the illegal status of crim­inals to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforce­ment’s (ICE) Law En­forcement Support Center.

Second, four New Mex­ico communities have declared themselves as “sanctuary cities.” The Legislature needs to pass a law forbidding any state agency, county, or munic­ipality from withholding the immigration status of people who are arrested for committing a crime. New Mexico has one of the worst crime problems in the nation. Why are mayors and city councilors ignoring public safety even though legal citizens are demanding a change?

Third, we need to stop issuing drivers licenses to people who are, by defini­tion, “undocumented”. The current practice of issuing driver’s licenses to non-cit­izens only legitimizes the breakdown of our border.

Based upon the success­ful policies and actions of previous Presidents, we know the Biden adminis­tration has the ability to protect our border and our citizens. If they continue to refuse to protect us, we need to place the National Guard at the border to do the job our federal govern­ment continues to neglect. The Democrat Governor of Arizona and the Repub­lican Governor of Texas have already done this. Governor Lujan-Grisham, our citizens deserve to be protected as well.

In the upcoming special session, Republicans will be introducing several bills that increase public safety, such as the ones contained in this letter. We will also introduce a bill that creates guidelines for the judiciary to limit the scope of catch and release, when it comes to violent crime and drug trafficking.

Our children and grand­children will ultimately bear the brunt of our fail­ure to act. Make no mis­take, it will be our fault for allowing this crisis to go unchecked. We can end our public safety crisis, how­ever, we must be willing to punish criminals when they break the law.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Jim Townsend of Artesia is the New Mexico State Repre­sentative for House Dis­trict 54.)

John Steinbeck’s classic novel The Grapes of Wrath turned 85 years old a few weeks back. Steinbeck’s clas­sic hit the reading public during the Great Depression and dramatized the mass migration of poor Oklahomans to California in the 1930s through the story of a single family — the Joads.

I’ve read The Grapes of Wrath more than once. There are many rea­sons I’ve returned to it.

First, curiosity. More than a few critics over the decades have hailed The Grapes of Wrath as the Great American Novel. As a curious 20-something just learning the won­ders of reading for pleasure, I picked the book up in the 1980s to see if the critics were right.

They were.

Second, California history. For a time in the 1990s I lived in that state’s Central Valley around Stock­ton, a locale favored by many Okla­homans in the 1930s who worked the fields in the state’s major crop-pro­ducing region. The in-migration of Oklahomans caused deep upset, even violence, as Californians’ resentment festered into accusations that the newcomers were taking their jobs and weakening their bargaining pow­er for higher wages. Not to be blunt, but 1930s America sounds a lot like 2024 America.

That brings me to the third, and most significant reason I’ve returned to The Grapes of Wrath time and again. It is the powerful ethical ques­tions Steinbeck demands of his read­ers. Who deserves your compassion and empathy? Put another way, who is your neighbor and what do you owe him or her?

As a child raised in the Deep South of church-going parents in the 1960s, 70s and 80s, these were potent ques­tions in my growing up years. Not because they were particular to my family, but because they were ques­tions of particular significance in the Deep South of my childhood and youth during the Civil Rights era when many white Southerners (the people around which I spent most of my time growing up) touted their bona fides as Christians. Many white Southern Christians of that era do not look good from the vantage point of 2024.

I wonder how Christians will look to future generations of Americans looking back on our times. Let me be clear, I have no problem with people celebrating their faith, whatever faith it is. But as a person raised on the Bi­ble — my childhood and youth were spent in thrice-weekly church ser­vices and weekly Bible studies — I hear echoes of Jesus’ ethical admoni­tions in his parable of the Sheep and Goats (Matthew 25: 31-46) when I read The Grapes of Wrath: Jesus ex­pressly tells his followers that those who help the least of these — the most vulnerable, the needy — are, in effect, helping him. Among Je­sus’ exhortations in this passage also is a call to welcome the stranger, a repeated ethical obligation ancient Israelites were more than familiar with, as was Jesus, thanks to He­brew prophets repeatedly reminding them of God’s ethical expectations: because the ancient Israelites were once foreigners in their own land af­ter escaping Egypt where they were enslaved, they should show kindness to strangers and foreigners them­selves.

I do not bring up these biblical pas­sages to instigate an argument over how best to interpret biblical passag­es. I mention it because as a person raised on the Bible I find in Jesus’ parables a particularly persuasive model of how one should live their life. But I am also a person who’s been around politics for years. And, frankly, I’m at the point that when a politician or political candidate men­tions God, Jesus or the Bible on the campaign trail, I roll my eyes. It’s unfortunate. I’m certain there are earnest, devout politicians among all the candidates and elected officials.

But I’ve witnessed so much done in the name of God and Jesus by op­portunistic politicians who under­stand that using God, Jesus and the Bible as props is a cheap way to win votes or legislative support, that I’ve become skeptical of name dropping the sacred. Another biblical passage pops into mind when I see displays of public piety: the one in which Je­sus exhorts his followers to not be like the hypocrites who pray on street corners and public places so that they are seen, but to pray in private where no one knows you are praying.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Trip Jen­nings started his career in Georgia at his hometown newspaper, The Augusta Chronicle. Since 2005, he has covered politics and state gov­ernment for the Albuquerque Jour­nal, The New Mexico Independent and the Santa Fe New Mexican. In 2012, he co-founded New Mexico In Depth, a nonpartisan, nonprofit media outlet that produces investi­gative, data-rich stories with an eye on solutions that can be a catalyst for change.)

The most dramatic change in the NM legislature in re­cent years has been the triumph of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. In 2017 progressive Brian Egolf replaced Republican Don Tripp as Speaker of the House. In 2020 three moderate Democrats were ousted from the Senate, replaced by progressives, leaving both chambers in progressive hands. Progressive clout in the House in­creased with the 2022 elections, and Egolf, who left the House voluntarily, was replaced by even more progres­sive Javier Martinez.

NM progressives come in four flavors, often mixed: (1) those who want to reverse the rise of what some describe as “crony capitalism” and other distributional inequities; (2) those concerned about identity politics, such as wom­en’s rights, gay rights, ethnic equality, etc.; (3) environ­mentalists; and (4) gun control advocates. While versions of these can be found within the Republican camp, it is progressive Democrats who have tried to codify them through legislation.

Speaker Javier Martinez has spent two legislative ses­sions managing these factions, while at the same time accommodating the agenda of a sometimes-progressive governor, who wields a powerful veto stick, while fend­ing off attempts by moderate Democrats and Republicans to quash parts of his agenda. Senate leadership appears to be an unstable alliance between politically correct pro­gressives and more traditional moderates. As the primary election nears, it bears asking, how well have progres­sives fared? Are the primary elections likely to lead to any changes in direction?

Like their moderate Democratic and Republican coun­terparts when they were in power, following the gover­nor’s lead progressives avoided issues voters most want fixed. No effort in either chamber exists to fix education, with plans and deadlines. Chunks of money were tossed at early childhood education but with no accountability. Accountability in higher education? Let them drink wine. A college president whose institution ties for last place in the US News and World Report rankings of Western regional universities will be remembered for his lavish junkets abroad and cases of $800 wine; and that he got away with it.

And while the state’s mental health system — de­stroyed by Governor Susana Martinez a decade ago — has received generous funding, again, no clear plan, no deadlines. Likewise, no urgency exists to raise to New Mexico’s ranking in health care above the normal bottom 10-15, where it stands now, or to address the demoralized workforce in much of state government.

The most striking thing about progressive rule is that legislative ambition has aimed only for modest change, sometimes change nobody knew was needed. The most predictable thing is that they, like previous regimes, have spent money like drunken sailors with record revenues thanks to the frack­ing many of them claim to detest.

Within a narrow lane of modesty, there have been modest achievements, not all of them “progressive” in tone. State cash reserves to cover a rainy day improved our fiscal standing. Anticipating the over­turning of Roe v Wade, an ancient ban on abortions was eliminated; there will be no Arizona here. While they lost — by one vote — a generous paid-sick-leave bill, this popular issue is likely to remain on the progressive agenda. A gun con­trol bill — 7-day waiting period — was passed, although public security, high on the voters’ list of priorities, was ignored so obviously that the governor has called a special session in July to deal with it. A few gestures at improving our tax code resulted in modest increases in corporate taxes and modest income tax reductions for all. Gaps in the coverage of the lottery scholarship were filled. All in all, this leg­islative record of progressives is not much different from legislative records of mod­erate leaders of the past twenty years, and Javier Martinez has proven to be surpris­ingly skilled at pragmatic-driven manage­ment.

Last year, when the bill mandating tam­pons for boys’ bathrooms in every school district in the state was signed into law, I predicted there would be a strong move to flip enough seats in the 2024 elections to form a coalition between moderate Democrats and Republicans in the House or Senate. They have done so before on several occasions. It appears I was wrong.

The tipoff came when Speaker Martinez made clear earlier this month, he would support all incumbent Democrats, pro­gressive or moderate. This suggests two things: first, as he surveys the scene he sees no serious threat to his re-election as Speaker next year. Despite a handful of heated primary races between moderates and progressives, and a last-minute plea from Jeff Apodaca for Norteño Hispanics to elect his favorite candidates, Martinez is probably correct. Moderates challeng­ing progressives and vice-versa will likely cancel each other out, give or take a seat or two, which he can afford. The Senate also appears to be headed back to progres­sive hands, although moderates may gain or lose a seat or two. And Republicans in the general election seem highly unlikely to acquire enough new legislators to be able to form a coalition with the handful of moderates left in the House.

Second, the Bullring lobbyists, whose money flows toward power, not ideol­ogy, have found most of their interests intact. They, not the national money for conservative or progressive causes, still determine the local terms of debate in leg­islative races. This is the real reason pro­gressives refuse to tackle the longstanding failures of New Mexico state government, and why no statewide unified effort to reduce progressive power has emerged. My fellow Democrats, Speaker Martinez seems to say, let us all hold hands and await the probable outcome of the prima­ry and general elections. Welcome to the land of entrenchment.

(EDITOR’S NOTE: Dr. Jose Z. Garcia taught in the Government Department at New Mexico State University for nearly four decades. He was appointed Secre­tary of Higher Education by Gov. Susana Martinez in 2011 and served in that ca­pacity for four years. He writes columns for El Rito Media, owners of the Artesia Daily Press and Rio Grande Sun.)