Luján proposes legislation to make Hatch Act violation decisions more transparent

U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján, a New Mexico Democrat, introduced a bill that would require Congress to be notified of alleged Hatch Act violations. The Hatch Act regulates partisan political activities for most federal executive branch employees and some state and local employees. “The Hatch Act was signed into law to prevent public officials from using their position for political gain while protecting federal employees from political influence,” Luján said in a news release. “However, when potential violations do occur, the Office of Special Counsel has failed to investigate and prosecute some of the most serious claims, undermining the American people and the rule of law.”

Luján’s bill, which has not been assigned a number yet, would require the OSC to report to Congress in the event it declines to investigate an alleged Hatch Act violation and to provide an annual report to the Chair and Ranking Members Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. The proposed public report would include the number of allegations received by the Special Counsel in the previous year and the number of allegations that resulted in an investigation, with separate data sets for political appointees and career federal workers.

Kids Online Safety Act reintroduced in U.S. Senate

The internet can be a dangerous place for young people, especially social media platforms where children and adults can interact with minimal or nonexistent barriers. To help combat the dangers children may face online, Democratic U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján and others reintroduced the Kids Online Safety Act which was sponsored by Connecticut Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal and Tennessee Republican Sen. Marsha Blackburn. The bill, however, is controversial and many privacy, tech and LGBTQ+ groups oppose the bill, and they say it could actually cause harm to minors by restricting access to information based on what state attorneys general determine to be harmful. This comes as states throughout the country target abortion access and LGBTQ+ rights. “Big Tech knows that the algorithms they use to maximize time spent online also lead to harm, particularly for children,” Luján said in a statement supporting the bill.

Governor, Senators respond to congressional debt ceiling fight

New Mexico’s Democratic governor and senators responded to the debt ceiling bill passed by the House Wednesday. The bill seeks to extend the debt limit with budgetary cuts some have called “draconian.” New Mexico’s senators refer to the bill as the “Default on America Act.”

HR 2811, also known as the Limit, Save Grow Act of 2023, passed the U.S. House on a party line vote of 217-215 Wednesday. Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham signed off on a letter along with nine other governors to Senate and House leadership opposing HR 2811. “We write today to express our firm opposition to any efforts that would cut funding for programs that hundreds of millions of Americans pay into and rely on for their health care, retirement benefits, and more,” the letter states. “As governors, we are uniquely positioned to best understand the needs of our residents, and waivers represent a needed tool to meet those needs.

The debt ceiling debate and what it means to New Mexicans

Two dueling bills in Congress attempt to address the debt ceiling and these actions could include harsh cuts that may affect New Mexicans. One of the bills would eliminate the debt ceiling altogether while the other expands the debt ceiling and imposes deep cuts, including to social programs like food assistance. These proposed cuts in the Limit, Save, Grow Act of 2023, which was proposed by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, on April 19, include recalling unspent pandemic-related funding, ending President Joe Biden’s student loan forgiveness plan, repealing green tax credits, cutting funding to the IRS and limiting other discretionary spending. The bill’s cuts seek to save taxpayers $45 trillion. “The spending limits are not draconian.

Two separate court rulings throws the future of abortion medication into uncertainty

Two conflicting rulings on Friday leave the future use of the abortion medication mifepristone uncertain, though because of one of the rulings, it could remain legal in New Mexico. There are two rulings in separate states that conflict with one another on the use of the abortion medication mifepristone and the judicial decisions both order the U.S. Federal Drug Administration to act differently with regard to the drug. The ruling made by a Texas federal district judge could force the FDA to remove mifepristone off the market after a seven-day injunction period. But, a ruling also made by a Washington state federal district judge could mean that in 17 states, including New Mexico, the drug would continue to be legally available. But, with two different rulings provided by two different judges that are in direct conflict with each other, there is considerable uncertainty as to the future of abortion medication, reproductive rights advocates said during a national press conference on Monday.

Senate votes to end authorizations for Gulf, Iraq wars

Both of New Mexico’s U.S. Senators were in the bipartisan majority in voting to repeal the decades-old authorizations of use of military force in Iraq. 

The chamber voted 66-30 to repeal the AUMFs. The authorizations came in 1991 and 2002 and have been used to justify American military actions throughout the Middle East well beyond their initial conflicts. Attempts to end the wide-spanning AUMFs over the years have fallen short, most recently in 2021, when a Republican blockade ended the White-House-backed proposal. Both of New Mexico’s U.S. Senators are Democrats. “Congress has the significant responsibility to authorize when and where we send troops into battle.

New Mexico and Texas could get new interstate

A new interstate, I-27, could run from Laredo, Texas to Raton as part of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor. U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján, a Democrat from New Mexico, signed onto bipartisan legislation introduced by U.S. Senators Ted Cruz and John Cornyn, Republicans from Texas, to formally name the Ports-to-Plains Corridor Interstate 27. U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, a Republican from Texas,introduced the bill in the U.S. House of Representatives. “I was proud to work together with Senator Cruz to designate a portion of the Ports-to-Plains Corridor as an addition to the interstate system last Congress,” Luján said in a news release. “We are continuing to work together to support the development of this corridor in New Mexico and Texas.

Screenshot of U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Lujan addressing the New Mexico Legislature on Feb. 21, 2022.

Lujàn and Stansbury address the Legislature

U.S. Sen. Ben Ray Luján and U.S. Rep. Melanie Stansbury, both Democrats, spoke to state legislators during a joint legislative session Tuesday. Luján spoke about bipartisan legislative efforts at the federal level, his recovery from a stroke he suffered last year and what legislating means to him. “That’s what this body is, incredible leaders from all over New Mexico, every small town, village, big town and big city,” Luján said. “A big part of what we do together is navigating those challenges when it comes to constituent casework one at a time. One person at a time, one family at a time.

Respect for Marriage Act passes Congress: What it means for New Mexicans

The U.S. House passed the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that protects same sex and interracial marriage, on Thursday. The bill previously passed the U.S. Senate. President Joe Biden is expected to sign it. He has expressed his support, saying “love is love,” in a previous statement. The U.S. Senate passed the bill with bipartisan support, with 61 to 36 votes last week when 12 Republicans joined Democrats in voting for its passage.

U.S. Senate passes bill to protect same sex and interracial marriage

With a vote of 61 to 36, the U.S. Senate passed the Respect for Marriage Act five months after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Since the court overturned the 1973 landmark decision, LGBTQ advocates have expressed concern that the court would use similar logic to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges. The court’s majority made the argument when overturning Roe in its Dobbs decision that the 14th amendment does not explicitly include a right to bodily autonomy. But since 1965, the court has ruled in various decisions that the amendment can be interpreted that it does. Justice Clarence Thomas, in a concurring opinion to the Dobbs decision, said the court should revisit prior court opinions that rest on the 14th amendment, including Obergefell v. Hodges.