Sandy Jones

New Mexico stands in a unique position to leverage our vast energy resources – both traditional oil and gas and renewables – while also preserving environmental stewardship for our public lands.

For energy, costs are rising, and demand has skyrocketed. Electricity use nationally is expected to grow up to 25% by 2030 to power the AI revolution and our expanding advanced manufacturing industrial base. In that same period, the risk of electric grid outages could increase a hundredfold if our current pace of energy infrastructure development doesn’t keep up with demand, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. As both a businessman and a former member of the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission, I know that ensuring reliable, affordable energy depends on our ability to build and develop infrastructure efficiently. But that does not mean ignoring well-balanced environmental safeguards and conservation efforts. Given that revenues from oil and gas development provide about 40 percent of our state’s budget, we can and must find a solution.

The current federal-permitting system, however, is outdated and not fit for a modern energy economy and is holding New Mexico back. The decades-old system is making life harder for everyday New Mexicans struggling with high energy costs and for entrepreneurs facing red tape that stifles innovation and investment. In its current form, the permitting process delays and derails exactly the kind of projects that could address modern needs and secure our future. Fortunately, there are common-sense, bipartisan measures on the table to fix it.

I deeply appreciate the beauty and importance of New Mexico’s federal lands – which make up more than 27% of our state. Yet the permitting system designed to ensure responsible development of our resources has been misused across administrations. The Bureau of Land Management too often fails to use tools Congress has already approved to provide a consistent and reliable approval process, and project barriers with no meaningful environmental benefit continue to delay responsible energy development on federal lands. The result is a backlogged system that raises costs and hampers innovation. Congress must act and restore permit predictability by mandating the use of proven tools to evaluate energy projects and streamlining the review process when the Federal Government has only an adjacent interest to state and private mineral rights.

Another law in need of modernization is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). While originally intended to ensure responsible development, NEPA was written more than a half-century ago during a very different era of energy projects and infrastructure development. Its vague, outdated language now enables legal challenges that weaponize the process to delay critical projects of all kinds. Durable Congressional action is needed to clarify the law’s intent, standardize timelines, and improve efficiency.

There is broad bipartisan agreement that the current permitting system is broken. Decisive action by Congress is essential to fix it. To be clear, strong environmental protections and efficient permitting are not mutually exclusive – they can and must work hand in hand.

New Mexico is fortunate to have leaders in Congress committed to lowering costs and helping developers meet our state’s growing energy needs regardless of energy source. Our Congressional delegation, including Senator Martin Henrich who sits on the important Energy & Natural Resources Committee, can best serve New Mexicans by championing common-sense permitting reforms that deliver immediate and lasting benefits for our energy future and preserve our environmental standards.

Sandy Jones is a businessman and public servant from New Mexico who served multiple terms on the New Mexico Public Regulation Commission.

Sherry Robinson
All She Wrote

My husband has many fine qualities. One is that he has insurance.

During years of freelance writing, one thing I haven’t had to worry about is insurance coverage. But I’m acutely aware that circumstances haven’t favored many a fellow freelancer or with millions of other people who aren’t insured through an employer.

Critics may paint Obamacare as some form of socialized medicine that benefits bums, but from my perspective as a business journalist, it’s an economic underpinning for the self-employed and small businesses that can’t offer insurance. It’s indispensable to the entrepreneur, the artisan, the handyman and legions of workers like them.

What I hear from the insured is that it’s no-frills coverage. It could be better, but it’s affordable (barely). Now the “big beautiful bill” threatens to triple their premiums. If they’re unable to pay, their only choice is to go uninsured. That only works for the young and healthy.

So Democrats drew a line in the sand, and here we are in a government shutdown.

In “Breakdown: Lessons for a Congress in Crisis” former U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman provided a thoughtful history of government shutdowns and government dysfunction, which have worsened since he published the book in 2022. The down-to-earth Bingaman is a moderate Democrat who represented New Mexico for 30 years in the Senate. Norm Ornstein, of the American Enterprise Institute, called Bingaman a model senator and a “workhorse, not a show horse.”

When Bingaman became a senator in 1983, President Ronald Reagan was in his first term, Republicans controlled the Senate, and Democrats held the House. “Congressional leaders of both parties shared a sense of responsibility for keeping the government and the Congress functioning,” he wrote.

Members of Congress and the president observed norms about how their branches of government should function. Norms aren’t rules or laws but “understandings and traditions about how officeholders and institutions behave and interact,” Bingaman wrote. They’ve been called the “soft guardrails” of American democracy.

Norms ended when Newt Gingrich became Speaker of the House in 1994 and delivered government shutdowns in 1995 and 1996, introducing a new tactic in negotiations with the president, in this case Bill Clinton. Gingrich argued that the right not to pass money bills was the only weapon Congress had to counter the president’s veto. Bingaman argued then that Gingrich’s “right” was an abuse of power and contrary to the designs of the founding fathers.

In 2013 Republicans shut down government over the Affordable Care Act. ACA was then three and a half years old, but Republicans added language to the spending bill to delay its implementation. Democrats controlled the Senate, and Obama was still in office, so the Rs held up a continuing resolution and government closed.

Donald Trump in 2018 became the first president to shut down government over support for his border wall. Rep. Tom Cole, R-OK, worried about impacts on midterms, saying, “I don’t see how putting the attention on shutting down the government when you control the government is going to help you.” Trump waited until after the elections to shut down the government.

The same year, Democrats shut down government (Bingaman thought this was a mistake) over the legal status of Dreamers. After Republicans promised full debate of proposals to continue Dreamers’ legal protections, Dems approved the spending bill. They never got that debate.

And now the Rs want Dems to sign off with the promise that they’ll take up ACA premiums. It’s like Lucy urging Charlie Brown to kick that football she’s holding.

Throughout this turmoil, Bingaman believed that shutting down the government was “an ineffective and damaging way to gain leverage in a policy dispute” because it fails to achieve its purpose and reinforces public perceptions of government dysfunction.

He agreed with his friend, former Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tennessee, who said: “Shutting down the government of the United States of America should never, ever be used as a bargaining chip for any issue, period. It should be to governing as chemical warfare is to real warfare. It should be banned. It should be unthinkable.”

Bingaman worried in 2022 that we had reached a point where the public judges how serious a politician is on a given issue by whether he or she is willing to shut down government. “And the more demagoguery on display before the shutdown occurs, and during the shutdown, the more difficult it is to resolve the dispute,” Bingaman wrote.

That’s truer than ever, and it’s gotten much worse. Shutting down government is not only a weapon of the party out of power, currently it’s a weapon of the party wielding power.

Sherry Robinson is a longtime New Mexico reporter and editor. She has worked in Grants, Gallup, the Albuquerque Journal, New Mexico Business Weekly and Albuquerque Tribune. She is the author of four books. Her columns won first place in 2024 from New Mexico Press Women.

Rep. Elaine Sena Cortez
District 62

Recently, a Democrat colleague in the New Mexico Legislature referred to Republican members as “fascists.” Also, at a recent Legislative committee meeting, another Democrat colleague accused federal ICE agents of acting like the “KKK.” In addition, several Democratic officials now proclaim to be “Democratic Socialists.” These exchanges caused me to reflect on the state of affairs surrounding politics in New Mexico.

There was a time when “communism” was viewed as an existential threat to our Country’s existence. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy bravely stared down the evils of communism during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Brave Americans, including my own father, fought communism in Vietnam. From the Soviet Union to the People’s Republic of China, history has shown the atrocities and death tolls of communist regimes.

In 1848, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels published the Communist Manifesto. This manual outlines the goals of the communist movement. Those goals include, among other things: destruction of the family; “liberation” of children from their parents; destruction of religion; and abolition of nationality and the elimination of borders. Importantly, in the preface of the Manifesto, Engels joins socialism and communism hand in hand. In short, he proclaims that communism is the next step of socialism.

In 1935, a group of Marxist Communists came to the United States and embedded themselves at Columbia University. They referred to themselves as the Frankfurt School. Among their members was Wilhelm Reich, who believed the family was authoritarian and championed women’s infidelity and children’s sexual liberation. By these measures, Reich believed there would be more women and children available to satisfy men’s sexual desires. Today, the ideas of the Frankfurt School are being implemented on college campuses around the United States.

This history is important so that we can understand what we are seeing in politics today. Democratic Socialists, a wing of the Progressive movement, have gained tremendous influence in New Mexico’s political landscape.

Where the Manifesto calls for the destruction of the family, progressives passed S.B. 10 (2021), which legalized abortion in New Mexico without restrictions. What’s more alarming is that in 2019, the abortion measure failed with a few Democrats voting with Republicans against it. Those same Democrats were targeted by their own party and replaced with progressive people.

Where the Manifesto calls for the “liberation” of children from their parents, New Mexico progressives passed H.B. 7 (2023), wherein a child can begin gender transitioning treatment without parental consent.

Where the Manifesto calls for the destruction of religion, today we see houses of worship draped in “Pride” flags. Churches followed executive mandates to close during the COVID pandemic. Faith leaders refrain from publicly condemning abortion for fear of reprisal from politicians and the media. Politicians eliminate God in public speeches, then swiftly seek to fill the void with the religion of politics.

Where the Manifesto calls for the destruction of borders, today we see politicians publicly attack ICE agents and call for the elimination of ICE detention centers. Never mind that the ICE detention center in Otero County was established in 2008 under the leadership of Governor Bill Richardson, a Democrat. Never mind that estimates show over thirty percent of ICE agents are Hispanic. Never mind that many undocumented workers are being exploited by their employers without recourse.

And so, according to my colleagues in the New Mexico Legislature, those who do not support progressive ideas are “fascists.” Where did this come from? Another member of the Frankfurt School was Theodor Adorno. He created the “F-scale,” which labeled people in degrees of fascism by their support for traditional families or their participation in religion. Call me “old fascist,” but these are two pillars of the Hispanic family many of us were raised in. Furthermore, the attacks on President Trump as a fascist ignore the measures taken by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, a Democrat, from 1933 to 1945. Those measures include: placing Japanese Americans in internment camps, packing the US Supreme Court to push New Deal measures; and expanding the financial powers of the executive. Ironically, historical accounts of President Roosevelt do not depict him as a fascist.

So, you may ask yourself, “Why is New Mexico last in education, last in child well-being, first in crime, and one of the poorest states in the Nation?” The answer is clear – in line with the aims of socialism and communism – it’s supposed to be this way. The Democratic Party is under siege by communism. In the wake of this siege, the Democratic Party has abandoned thousands of New Mexicans who believe that faith and family are the foundations of strong communities. They push hate, demand loyalty, and silence any dissenters. They no longer represent the spirit of New Mexico.

Please do not interpret this article as an attack on my Democrat colleagues. I have formed many friendships across the aisle in the Legislature. I value those friendships. I see the inner turmoil of many of my Democrat colleagues. They are often faced with the dilemma of adherence to progressive dogmas or preparing for an election challenge from their own Party. I do not envy their situation. The goal of this article is to reveal the nefarious motive of an old political movement that has resurfaced in our State. I implore proud New Mexicans to wake up. You don’t have to become Republican, although you are welcome in our Party, but at a minimum, you must reject the progressive “socialists” ideas in your own party in order to save our State.

Rep. Elaine Sena Cortez of Hobbs represents New Mexico’s 62nd District in the State House of Representatives.