Former Las Cruces Mayor contemplating run for New Mexico governor
In a news release on Feb. 27, 2025, Miyagishima, 61, announced he formed an "exploratory committee" for the 2026 election. Miyagishima told the Sun-News he would determine if he would run by May and that a potential run would be in the New Mexico Democratic Party.
Miyagishima said his committee of six or seven people have been working on a potential run for the past two years and that he will expand the committee to include folks throughout the state.
Deb Haaland, a Democrat and former Interior Secretary and New Mexico congresswoman, announced her intent to run for Governor earlier in February. On his website, Miyagishima acknowledged Haaland's announcement, stating, "We love Deb Haaland don't get us wrong, we hope for huge things for her, but she's not the right person for this moment, in this place."
Miyagishima was the Las Cruces Mayor for 16 years, stepping down prior to the 2023 municipal election with Eric Enriquez winning the election to replace him. He previously held elected positions as Doña Ana County Commissioner and Las Cruces City Councilor. He lost a state race for the New Mexico House of Representatives in 1990 to Republican Leonard Rawson.
Miyagishima oversaw historical population growth in Las Cruces during his mayoral stint. He also managed the city's response amid the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
He is currently an adjunct finance professor at New Mexico State University.
Miyagishima has lived in Las Cruces since 1971 and graduated from New Mexico State University in 1985.
"I am deeply grateful for the opportunity to have served as mayor, and to make a difference in our community," Miyagishima said in a news release. "Now, I am ready to take that experience, and those lessons learned to a broader platform. This exploratory committee will allow me to engage with New Mexicans, including our elected officials, hear their concerns, and explore how I can best serve as governor."
On his website, Miyagishima touts a platform that includes housing, retirement, healthcare, education reform, economic opportunities, crime reduction, homelessness, generational wealth creation, and sustainable development.
The exploratory committee will be composed of policy experts and volunteers, according to a news release. The committee's mission is to connect with residents across the state to discuss critical issues. Miyagishima plans to hold a series of town hall meetings in the coming months, which will be available in both in-person and virtual formats.
"I am excited about the opportunity to connect with people from all corners of our state and to discuss the vision we can create together," Miyagishima said in a release. "Leadership is about listening and responding to the needs of our communities, and I am committed to doing just that. I have dedicated my life to serving our community, and I am enthusiastic about the potential to expand that service to the entire state of New Mexico."
This article originally appeared on Las Cruces Sun-News: Ken Miyagishima contemplating run for New Mexico governor
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
12 minutes ago
Maryland tax on digital ads violated Big Tech's free speech, judges say
ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- Maryland's first-in-the-nation tax on digital advertising violated the Constitution, a federal appeals court says, because blocking Big Tech from telling customers about the tax violates the companies' right to free speech. Supporters say Maryland needed to overhaul its tax methods in response to significant changes in how businesses advertise. The tax focuses on large companies that make money advertising on the internet such as Meta, Google and Amazon, who say they're being unfairly targeted. The ongoing legal fight is being watched by other states that are considering taxes for online ads. Maryland estimated the tax could raise about $250 million a year to help pay for a sweeping K-12 education measure. Maryland's law says the companies must not only pay the tax, but avoid telling customers how it affects pricing, with no line items, surcharges or fees, said the appeals court Friday in siding with trade associations fighting the tax. Judge Julius Richardson cited the Colonial-era Stamp Act, which helped spark the Revolutionary War, and wrote that 'criticizing the government — for taxes or anything else — is important discourse in a democratic society.' The plaintiffs contended Maryland lawmakers were trying to insulate themselves from criticism and political accountability by forbidding companies from explaining the tax to their customers. 'A state cannot duck criticism by silencing those affected by its tax,' the judge wrote. The unanimous ruling by the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reverses a decision by U.S. District Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby and sends the case back to her with instructions to consider an appropriate remedy in light of the panel's decision. Trade groups praised the decision. 'Maryland tried to prevent criticism of its tax scheme, and the Fourth Circuit recognized that tactic for what it was: censorship,' said Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, said in a statement. Maryland Comptroller Brooke Lierman, who is the defendant in the case, and the Maryland attorney general's office, who is representing the state, declined to comment Monday. The law has been challenged in multiple legal venues, including Maryland Tax Court, where the case is ongoing. The law imposes a tax based on global annual gross revenues for companies that make more than $100 million globally. Under the law, the tax rate is 2.5% for businesses making more than $100 million in global gross annual revenue; 5% for companies making $1 billion or more; 7.5% for companies making $5 billion or more and 10% for companies making $15 billion or more. The Maryland General Assembly, which is controlled by Democrats, overrode a veto of the legislation in 2021 by then-Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican.
27 minutes ago
Appeals court overturns order that stripped some protections from pregnant Texas state workers
NEW YORK -- A federal appeals court has upheld a law strengthening the rights of pregnant workers, vacating a judge's earlier order that had stripped those protections from Texas state employees. The ruling was a victory for advocates of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, a law that passed with bipartisan support in 2022 but quickly became embroiled in controversy over whether it covers workers seeking abortions and fertility treatments. A federal judge last year blocked enforcement of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act for Texas state employees, ruling that its passage was unconstitutional because a majority of House members were not physically present to approve the law as part of spending package in December 2022. In a 2-1 decision, the Fifth Circuit appeals court disagreed, finding that the law was properly passed under a COVID-19 pandemic-era Congressional rule allowing members to vote by proxy to meet the quorum requirement. The Pregnant Workers Fairness Act strengthens the rights of women to receive workplace accommodation for needs related to pregnancy and childbirth, such as time off for medical appointments and exemptions from heavy lifting. Its passage came after a decades long campaign by women's advocacy groups highlighting the struggles of pregnant workers, especially those in low-wage roles, who were routinely forced off the job after requesting accommodations. The Texas case differed from other lawsuits that have narrowly focused on federal regulations stating that abortion, fertility treatments and birth control are medical issues requiring protection under the new law. The lawsuit, filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, instead took aim at the entirety of the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, drawing opposition from Republican lawmakers including former Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who defended the pandemic-era proxy voting rule. Under the Trump administration, the Department of Justice has continued to fight Paxton's lawsuit, which if successful, could help open the door to legal challenges of other pandemic-era laws passed by proxy. Paxton's office did not reply to emails seeking comment, and it was not clear whether he would appeal Friday's ruling. The Justice Department declined to comment. 'This is a big win for women's rights. We are really happy to see that the Fifth Circuit agreed with us that the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act was passed constitutionally and will continue to fight for the PWFA to stay legal,' said Inimai Chettiar, president of a Better Balance, an advocacy group that spearheaded the campaign for passage of the law. Texas state employees are not immediately protected, however, because the appeals court ruling doesn't become final for several weeks to give time for a possible appeal, Chettiar said. Conservative officials and religious groups, meanwhile, have been largely successfully in challenging the regulations passed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, which established that workers seeking abortions are entitled accommodations. In May, a federal court struck down the abortion provisions of the EEOC regulations in response to lawsuits brought by states of Louisiana and Mississippi, and the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholic University and two Catholic dioceses. The Trump administration is almost certain to comply with that ruling. President Donald Trump in January fired two of the EEOC's democratic commissioners, paving the way for him to quickly establish a Republican majority at the agency. EEOC Acting Chair Andrea Lucas, a Republican, has signaled her support for revising the regulations, arguing the agency exceeded its authority by including not only abortion but fertility treatments and birth control as medical needs covered by the law.
28 minutes ago
Beshear bans drug in Kentucky that's being targeted by attorneys general across the nation
FRANKFORT, Ky. -- Kentucky Gov. Andy Beshear took emergency action Monday to ban the sale of 'designer Xanax,' responding to a request from his state's attorney general who is leading a broader effort to combat the highly potent synthetic drug linked to dozens of overdose deaths last year in the Bluegrass State. Beshear's action in his state comes as a coalition of 21 attorneys general, led by Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman, is urging the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration to take emergency action banning the unregulated drug. It poses a growing public health threat and is increasingly contributing to overdose deaths, the attorneys general said in a letter dated Monday to DEA Administrator Terry Cole. 'Law enforcement desperately needs the tools to drive this dangerous drug from our neighborhoods,' Coleman, a Republican, said in a news release. In Kentucky, the classification of bromazolam — widely known as 'designer Xanax' — as a Schedule 1 controlled substance took immediate effect following Beshear's emergency regulation. Bromazolam, Coleman has warned, is being passed off as prescription pills including benzodiazepines, which are commonly used to treat conditions such as anxiety disorders, insomnia, and seizures. He had urged Beshear's administration to ban the drug in Kentucky, and the governor's action on Monday empowers law enforcement to make arrests for selling or possessing the drug, Beshear's office said. 'This deadly drug has no place in our communities, and now we have the tools needed to get it off the streets and protect more lives,' the Democratic governor said in a release. Beshear, a former Kentucky attorney general now in his second term as governor, is widely seen as a potential candidate for president in 2028. The drug he and Coleman targeted has been tied to a growing number of fatal overdoses in Kentucky and across the nation, Beshear's office said. It was detected in nearly 50 overdose deaths in Kentucky last year, the office said. 'We live in a moment when as little as one pill can kill – and is killing – our kids,' Coleman said in response to Beshear's action. "I'm glad we could work together to tackle this grave threat.' In their letter to the head of DEA, the attorneys general said bromazolam is being sold illicitly on the streets and online. It is highly potent and unpredictable, they said, especially when combined with opioids or other central nervous system depressants. Unlike regulated medications, illicitly manufactured bromazolam lacks quality controls, making it particularly lethal for unsuspecting users, they said. 'Despite its clear dangers, bromazolam remains unscheduled at the federal level, creating significant challenges for law enforcement and public health officials trying to respond to this emerging crisis,' the letter said. 'Without scheduling, this drug continues to evade traditional regulatory and prosecutorial tools, hindering interdiction efforts and enabling continued distribution through illicit channels.' Emergency action by the DEA would help law enforcement remove the drug from circulation, give prosecutors the ability to hold traffickers accountable and would 'send a clear signal that this dangerous substance has no place on our streets,' the letter said. Besides Coleman, the request to the DEA included attorneys general from Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia, Coleman's office said.
