Crime package headed to New Mexico House
The New Mexico House Judiciary Committee voted on Wednesday afternoon in a 7-4 party-line vote to advance a package of six bills intended to reduce crime.
The package of legislation, including bills with sponsors from both parties, now heads to the floor of the House of Representatives. It was not clear on Wednesday when the House would actually vote.
Committee Chair Rep. Christine Chandler (D-Los Alamos) is sponsoring the package called House Bill 8. She said the bills were rolled into one in response to public interest 'and our commitment to the public to address crime swiftly.'
'We are doing that through a collection of bills that I think are very meaningful and impactful,' Chandler said.
A self-described Public Safety Coalition composed of 11 civic organizations issued a news release with comments it said would have been delivered had public comments been allowed in the hearing. However, Chandler said no public comments would be allowed as each bill within the package had already been through the public comment process.
In that statement, the coalition, which includes NM Native Vote, Equality New Mexico, the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico and Albuquerque Healthcare for the Homeless, said while members appreciated the collaborative work done to address their concerns about the criminal competency proposals, the final bill fails to address root causes and instead 'focuses on new crimes, increased punishments, and forced hospitalization.'
In a statement, ACLU-NM Interim Director of Public Policy Lena Weber said the caucus proposals 'wrapped up into HB8 now depart starkly from those championed by these community voices. While the proposal makes significant improvements from the proposals of the 2024 special session, HB8 still relies principally on coerced care and forced hospitalization, which we know often exacerbate the very problems they seek to fix.'
Rep. Steven McQueen (D-Santa Fe) said he voted for the package to reach the House, but said his vote on the floor 'may be different.' After the hearing, he told Source NM he opposes House Bill 106, which gives police officers more leeway to collect and test someone's blood if they are suspected of driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
Rep. Nicole Chavez (R-Albuquerque) said she voted against the package because it doesn't go far enough and doesn't include her proposed changes to the Delinquency Act, which governs how the state can hold children accountable for behavior that would be considered criminal if they were over 18.
Chandler said that bill would be inappropriate to include in this package because it hasn't been heard in any committee yet, while every bill in this package had already been discussed.
'It will be heard in due course,' Chandler told Chavez. 'It will not be in this package, as I understand it.'
House Bill 4 would give prosecutors more options to involuntarily commit people into a locked psychiatric facility if they are found to be dangerous and unable to stand trial.
House Bill 16 would increase sentences for trafficking fentanyl, depending on how many pills the defendant is convicted of possessing.
House Bill 31 would more severely punish the crime of threatening to shoot people by increasing the attached penalty from a misdemeanor, which carries a maximum possible jail sentence between six months and one year, to a fourth-degree felony, which comes with 18 months in prison.
House Bill 38 would ban devices that can convert semi-automatic firearms into fully automatic ones.
House Bill 50 would group together the sentences for four different crimes related to stealing motor vehicles. State law already requires longer prison terms if someone commits one of these crimes on multiple occasions, but HB50 would make subsequent convictions carry greater sentences for having violated any of the four statutes.
House Bill 106 would allow police officers to test someone's blood for drugs or alcohol if they refuse to take a breath test and the police have probable cause to believe they committed a misdemeanor. Existing law only allows police to test someone's blood when they drive under the influence and either kill or seriously injure someone, or when the drive impaired and the officer has probable cause to believe they also committed a felony while doing so.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
25 minutes ago
- USA Today
Get rid of mail-in voting? Trump goal sparks debate, threatened lawsuits
Trump has long railed against mail-in voting but experts say states and the Congress control election rules rather than the president. WASHINGTON – President Donald Trump's latest push to end absentee voting has ignited a firestorm of criticism and intense debate about the nation's election rules as the next midterm and presidential campaigns kick into gear. Election-law experts said a president has no role in governing elections. Advocacy groups threatened lawsuits aiming to block Trump. And Democrats braced for a political fight heading into the 2026 and 2028 election cycles as they look to rebound after a disastrous 2024 campaign. 'The Constitution gives states and Congress the power to run elections," said Michael Waldman, CEO of the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. "Presidents have no lawful role.' But White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters Aug. 19 that Trump would work with lawmakers to end mail-in voting because "this is a priority for the president." Here's what you need to know: How popular is mail-in voting? Mail-in voting is widespread and popular. Out of 155 million votes cast in 2024, nearly 47 million were mailed in, according to the Election Assistance Commission. Most states allow absentee voting for no reason, but some states require an excuse to avoid showing up in person. Eight states and Washington, DC, allow elections to be conducted entirely by mail, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. California, Colorado, Hawaii, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Vermont and Washington state mail ballots to all registered voters. Oregon Secretary of State Tobias Read said vote-by-mail elections are secure, accurate and honest. 'If he actually understood or cared about the American people, he'd know mail-in-voting is the best way to protect everyone's right to vote, especially rural folks, elderly people and hourly workers,' Read said. 'Mail-in-voting meets citizens exactly where they are: in their living rooms and around their kitchen tables.' Trump seeks to end mail-in voting Trump said Aug. 18 he would sign an executive order to abolish mail-in voting, which he slammed as vulnerable to fraud. Trump has long complained about absentee voting, since before the COVID-19 pandemic that shut down many in-person events. 'We're going to end mail-in voting," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. "It's a fraud." Trump's announcement came while special House races are pending in Arizona and Tennessee; New Jersey and Virginia will be choosing governors in November this year; and some big-city mayors will be chosen in New York and elsewhere. The whole country will be voting on House races and one-third of the Senate 2026, and for president in 2028. Despite Trump's claims, election experts said voting is the most secure in history. "As we have said repeatedly, our election infrastructure has never been more secure and the election community never better prepared to deliver safe, secure, free and fair elections for the American people," Jen Easterly, director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, said after the 2024 election. David Becker, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Election Innovation and Research, which works with election officials of both parties to ensure secure elections, said ballots are the most verifiable and recountable in history with only Louisiana not voting on paper. Audits confirm the results, he said. And Congress approved ID requirements to register to vote in the 2002 Help America Vote Act, which followed the razor-thin victory of President George W. Bush over Al Gore in 2000. Trump, Democrats expect political fight over mail-in ballots Trump argued the 2020 presidential result was rigged after what his aides called a "red mirage" of an Election Day lead disappeared as mail-in ballots were counted and Joe Biden won the White House. "I, AND THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WILL FIGHT LIKE HELL TO BRING HONESTY AND INTEGRITY BACK TO OUR ELECTIONS," Trump said in a social media post Aug. 18 advocating an end to mail-in voting. During the 2024 campaign, Republicans supported mail-in voting to avoid handing Democrats an advantage even as Trump occasionally criticized them. But the GOP sought an Election Day deadline for mailed ballots to be counted. Leavitt said the White House will work with lawmakers at federal and state levels to change the law. 'When the Congress comes back to Washington, I'm sure there will be many discussions with our friends on Capitol Hill and also our friends in state Legislatures across the country to ensure we're protecting the integrity of the vote for the American people," Leavitt said. But Democrats vowed to fight Trump efforts to undermine mail-in voting. While Republicans in the House could potentially approve a bill, it would face a steep challenge in the Senate, where 60 votes are needed to overcome a filibuster and where the GOP holds a 53-47 majority. 'Senate Democrats will make sure that any and every measure that would make it even more difficult for Americans to vote will be dead on arrival in the Senate and will continue to fight to protect our democracy," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York. Experts: States control election rules, not presidents The Constitution unambiguously says states regulate elections and only Congress can change that, Becker said. 'Getting rid of mail voting, which has been around since at least the U.S. Civil War, and which is offered by the vast majority of states, red and blue, is an incredibly bad idea that would make our elections much less secure and vulnerable to interference,' said Becker, a former election lawyer at the Justice Department. 'He has zero power to change election policy with the swipe of the pen, as the founders expressly stated.' Walter Olson, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute, said Trump "has no constitutional authority to end mail voting by executive order." "The Framers of the U.S. Constitution took care to keep the main responsibility for administering elections with the states and localities, which are in no way mere 'agents' of federal authorities," Olson said. Advocacy groups expect lawsuits if Trump moves against mail-in voting Federal courts have repeatedly recognized the state role in elections, including when a judge largley blocked Trump's March executive order dealing with elections. In Massachusetts, U.S. District Judge Denise Casper, an appointee of President Barack Obama, blocked parts of Trump's order that sought to require voters to prove they are citizens and to prevent states from counting mail-in ballots after Election Day. Trump is appealing. "The Constitution does not grant the president any specific powers over elections," Casper wrote. Advocacy groups said getting rid of mail-in voting could discourage millions of people who appreciate the flexiblity of avoiding voting in person on Election Day. "Many veterans, grappling with service-related disabilities like mobility impairments or PTSD, rely on this accessible method to vote independently and privately from home, avoiding the physical and emotional toll of in-person polling," said Naveed Shah, political director for Common Defense, a group representing military veterans and their families. Advocates from several groups expected lawsuits to challenge any Trump order seeking to abolish mail-in voting. 'We are prepared to protect mail-in voting in court against unfounded and unconstitutional attacks, as we have in Pennsylvania, Mississippi and other states,' said Sophia Lin Lakin, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Voting Rights Project. 'Access to mail-in voting is necessary to a fair and inclusive electoral process.'
Miami Herald
43 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
California's in a nationwide redistricting civil war. Who's favored to win?
California is a crucial battlefront in a coast-to-coast political civil war over congressional redistricting, a war that Republicans nationally appear better positioned to win. 'If all these Republican processes go through, even if California goes through, Republicans are probably going to end up winning this redistricting war,' said Matthew Klein, U.S. House and governors' race analyst at the nonpartisan Cook Political Report. It's easier for Republicans in states they dominate to redraw the maps, he explained, and the GOP is aggressively weighing whether to do so in Indiana, Florida, Missouri, Ohio and Texas. At the same time, there are potential roadblocks to mid-decade redistricting, a strategy almost unheard of. 'Right now it seems there's a political posturing to this where everybody is all taking a swing at this,' said Lee Miringoff, polling director at the Marist Institute for Public Opinion in New York. 'Whether they actually connect is probably going to be in court cases.' President Donald Trump and his allies are aggressively trying to get congressional maps redrawn in Republican-friendly states. Democrats are seeking ways to fight back in California, New York, Illinois and elsewhere. In Washington, Rep. Kevin Kiley, R-Roseville, who could be redrawn into a new, tougher-to-win district, is gaining support for legislation that would bar mid-term redistricting. And congressional leaders are using their muscle to create momentum for and against any plans to hurt their parties' chances of controlling Congress Democrats need a net gain of three seats in the 2026 election to regain control of the House for the first time since January 2023. History is on their side, as the party holding the White House traditionally loses a lot of seats in the middle of their term. Trump's Republicans lost a net 40 seats in 2018 and Democrats regained control of the House. Republicans won back control in the middle of President Joe Biden's term in 2022, as they gained nine seats. While it's still early to predict any outcomes, polling shows Trump's popularity sliding and Republican issues less popular. Inside Elections, a nonpartisan group that analyzes political races, says races for eight GOP House incumbents are toss-ups. Democrats have three in that category, including Reps. Adam Gray, D-Merced, and Derek Tran, D-Garden Grove. An August 9-11 Economist/YouGov poll had Trump's approval rating at 42% while 54% disapproved. A Democrat-controlled House would create political havoc for Trump. Democrats would not only set the chamber's agenda, but could launch investigations of the administration. Trump and his allies have been unusually bold in trying new strategies to maintain control, according to media reports and conversations with analysts around the country. Texas ignited the fire with its efforts to redraw its maps with the hope of gaining at least five more seats. California and Gov. Gavin Newsom struck back, creating their own new map aimed at winning five new Democratic seats. Now Republicans are eyeing a host of GOP-friendly seats. In Indiana, Vice President JD Vance met with state officials last week, and state Republicans are weighing whether to act. In Florida, House Speaker Daniel Perez sent a memo to lawmakers last week saying he was creating a new committee on congressional redistricting. The Miami Herald reported that whether it can act in time for the 2026 election is unclear. Officials are also weighing whether to redistrict in Indiana and Ohio, NPR has reported. Both states have huge legislative Republican majorities, big enough to overcome Democratic opposition. In Missouri, Republicans are reportedly considering breaking up the Kansas City-based district of Rep. Emanuel Cleaver, D-Mo., but also faces strict laws making mid-decade change difficult, NPR Kansas City reported. Democrats vigorously dispute the notion that Republicans have an advantage in the redistricting wars. 'Republicans are running scared. They know they can't win on the issues, so they are resorting to rigging the system in a desperate scheme to save their miniscule majority,' said Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She vowed 'Democrats everywhere are prepared to fight back, using every tool at our disposal.' Democrats, though, appear to have fewer opportunities to change the maps in this cycle. 'It's much more complicated for Democratic states,' said Darrell West, senior fellow at Washington's Brookings Institution. 'They tend to have independent redistricting commissions.' Many of the Republican states in play don't. In New York, Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, is said to be sympathetic to having new lines, but state law makes that nearly impossible until the 2028 election, Spectrum News reported. In Illinois, Gov. JB Pritzker has warmed to the idea, though it's unclear where he could draw new lines favorable to Democrats. There's also talk in heavily Democratic Maryland of redrawing the state's only GOP district, but that would be geographically tough because of how much of that district is east of the Chesapeake Bay. Even in California, nothing is assured. The redistricting effort has to survive the Legislature, court challenges and voters in November. 'That fight is going to be long and ugly,' said Klein of California. In Washington, there's action on two fronts. Speaker Mike Johnson made it clear this week that he'll do all he can to stop California's bid. Redistricting, he said, is not only a bad idea, but a vanity mission for Newsom. 'Gavin Newsom's latest attempt to disenfranchise millions of California voters was written in the dark of night' by party officials, Johnson said. 'This is a slap in the face to Californians who overwhelmingly support the California Citizens Redistricting Commission,' the Louisiana Republican said. Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has vowed to fight Republican efforts across the country. Asked on ABC News last week if the Democrats were starting a redistricting arms race, the New York Democrat said that has already begun. 'Certainly, under these circumstances, one cannot unilaterally disarm. The Republicans are counting on that as part of their scheme to try to steal the midterm elections and gerrymander these congressional maps with impunity across the country,' he said. 'We're not going to stand for it.' But will members of Congress support Kiley's legislation, which would bar mid-term line-drawing? Passage of his legislation would cool all these efforts. Congress doesn't return to Washington until Sept. 2, but there appears to be sentiment from members of both parties for legislation to stop the mid-term redistricting. 'Both parties have engaged in gerrymandering,' Kiley said. 'The entire justification for redrawing district lines is absent. The entire process is motivated by partisanship through and through.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Here are the Republicans targeted by California's proposed redistricting
Democrats have proposed a new congressional map for California that could offset Republican efforts to redistrict in Texas, giving the party a chance at five new Democratic House seats in the Golden State. Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) is leading a charge to put a redistricting ballot measure before voters in a special election this fall, a play to bypass California's independent redistricting commission and redraw lines mid-decade. State lawmakers introduced related legislation Monday and are expected to move quickly to set the plan in motion. The map, proposed by the Democrats' House campaign arm, needs to work its way through the Legislature — then survive legal challenges and get the green light from voters. But in its current form, it's expected to endanger five House Republicans and give Democrats a boost in some competitive seats. The GOP currently holds nine of California's 52 House seats. Here are the Republicans at risk in the new proposal. Rep. Kevin Kiley, 3rd Congressional District Rep. Kevin Kiley (R) has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of Newsom's redistricting plan, and he would be one of the lawmakers most impacted if the proposed maps move forward. Kiley's 3rd Congressional District would pick up some of the blue Sacramento while losing Death Valley, according to analysis from Cook Political Report, changing the seat from one that went to President Trump by 4 points to one that sided with former Vice President Kamala Harris by 10 points. 'Newsom is so desperate to get rid of me he's gerrymandered my district in the shape of an elephant. The 'trunk' captures as many Democrat voters as possible,' Kiley wrote on social media. 'Like all his attempts, this will fail. We'll keep beating him at the ballot box and the Capitol.' Kiley has proposed federal legislation that would ban mid-decade redistricting nationwide and nullify any new maps approved before the 2030 census. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, 1st Congressional District Rep. Doug LaMalfa's (R) 1st Congressional District would make a similarly drastic shift, jumping from a district Trump won by double digits to one that would have gone to Harris by more than 10 points, according to Cook Political Report. By shifting Democratic Rep. Jared Huffman's 2nd Congressional District in Marin County to take on more of California's northern border, LaMalfa's district would pick up parts of blue Santa Rosa. The seats held by Kiley and LaMalfa would both become 'likely' or even 'safe' Democratic seats, 'depending on the candidates and campaigns,' analysis from Sabato's Crystal Ball predicts. 'If you want to know what's wrong with these maps – just take a look at them. How on earth does Modoc County on the Nevada and Oregon Border have any common interest with Marin County and the Golden Gate Bridge?' LaMalfa wrote on X. The Congress member, who has held his seat for more than a decade, also sounded alarms that Newsom's efforts in California will 'set off a series of retaliation in other states across the country,' pointing to mid-decade chatter about redistricting in red Florida, Missouri and Indiana. Rep. Ken Calvert, 41st Congressional District Rep. Ken Calvert's (R) 41st Congressional District in Riverside County, which went to Trump by 6 points last fall, could be effectively replaced with a new seat in central Los Angeles County. The new Latino-majority seat would make for another solid Democratic pickup opportunity in the midterms — though Sabato's Crystal Ball notes it may be less so in future cycles, if Hispanic voters continue the rightward shift seen in the last election. Calvert, who has represented California in Congress for more than three decades, has stressed the popularity of California's existing independent redistricting commission, which voters approved in 2008 and 2010, as he pushes back on the Democrats' effort. 'A bipartisan majority of Californians oppose efforts to eliminate our Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission. It only adds insult to injury to ask taxpayers to pay hundreds of millions of dollars on a special election power grab that would wipeout the Commission's work,' Calvert has written on social media. Newsom has stressed that the redistricting measure would only bypass the commission through the 2030 election, then revert back to the commission's typical redraw timelines after each census. Rep. Darrell Issa, 48th Congressional District Democrats have long targeted Rep. Darrell Issa's (R) 48th Congressional District, where the incumbent won by double digits in November. Issa retired from Congress in 2018 but returned with a win in 2020. Under the map proposal, Issa's district would pick up Palm Springs, while other parts shift to nearby Democrats. That would flip his seat, according to Cook Political Report, from one that went to Trump by 15 points to one that would have gone to Harris by 3. Sabato's Crystal Ball suggests that Issa's seats would 'probably' become a toss-up if the map takes effect, along with Rep. David Valadao's (R) seat. Analysis from CalMatters, citing registration data in the district, dubs it 'the biggest reach' for Democrats. Rep. David Valadao, 22nd Congressional District Valadao, one of the two remaining House Republicans to have voted for Trump's impeachment after Jan. 6, 2021, would see his already competitive 22nd Congressional District in Central Valley get even more so under the new maps. Cook Political Report forecasts that Valadao's would shift from its current 'lean Republican' rating to toss-up territory — from a district that went to Trump by 6 points to one that would have favored Trump by a single digit — becoming 'the most tenuous for Democrats to flip' among the targeted districts. 'Neither political party should have the authority to rig maps to protect their own power,' Valadao said in a statement late last month, calling Newsom's effort a 'blatant power grab.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
