
In one of the country's poorest states, crippling budget cuts loom
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
'You couldn't design a budget-reconciliation package that would be worse for the state of New Mexico,' Sen. Martin Heinrich said at a health care forum.
Advertisement
But after years of robust federal spending in the state, some Republican legislators, who are in the minority in both chambers, are predicting that the new domestic policy bill will help root out waste and provide some tax relief.
'Just take a deep breath,' said state Rep. Mark Duncan, a Republican who sits on a new legislative subcommittee on federal funding. 'This is not going to happen tomorrow, for the most part.'
The state estimates that it will lose $2.8 billion annually in Medicaid funding, and as much as $352 million from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, which helps low-income families buy groceries. Six to eight rural hospitals could close within the next 24 months.
Advertisement
And out of roughly 22,000 jobs in state government, more than 2,000 are wholly funded by the federal government, while an additional 3,800 are partially funded, Wayne Propst, secretary of the Department of Finance and Administration, told the funding subcommittee.
To be sure, state budgets around the country have been generally strong of late thanks to billions in COVID-19 relief money and a record-breaking stock market. New Mexico has also been buoyed by robust oil and gas revenues.
But few sectors of the state will be untouched.
The Santa Fe Farmers' Market.
MERIDITH KOHUT/NYT
Manny Encinias, a cattle rancher and longtime vendor at the Santa Fe Farmers' Market, said some of his customers paid with SNAP food tokens. 'Suddenly, the rug has been pulled out from beneath us,' he said.
For now, here's how some New Mexicans are sizing up the new normal:
Medicaid and SNAP
The New Mexico Health Care Authority, which administers Medicaid and SNAP, estimates that 88,000 residents could lose Medicaid, and 58,000 could lose SNAP. Many officials are worried about bureaucratic snarls and widespread confusion.
Paulina Verduzco, 20, a restaurant host in Santa Fe, is already experiencing whiplash.
After being uninsured for two years, Verduzco was recently approved for Medicaid. But a few weeks ago, she received a $300 bill for a one-hour intake call, done over Zoom. Panicked, she talked to a case worker and was told it was a mistake.
She was also approved for SNAP, and on a recent Saturday at the Santa Fe Farmers' Market, she used her food tokens for the first time. She and her aunt purchased plants for cherry tomatoes, poblano peppers and lemon cucumbers to grow in their own tiny garden.
Advertisement
But two weeks later, Verduzco received a text informing her that she would no longer be receiving SNAP because she wasn't working enough hours -- even though she has been asking her employer for more hours. She is not sure if the cutoff was a result of the new federal policy, but work requirements are about to become even more stringent.
'You aren't making enough money to receive government money -- make that make sense,' Verduzco said.
Gutting SNAP could squeeze the state's Double Up Food Bucks initiative, which enables recipients to buy fresh local produce at half the price, and bolsters ranchers and farmers, said Encinias, who owns Trilogy Beef and Buffalo Creek Ranch in Moriarty, and is also executive director of the Santa Fe Farmers' Market Institute.
'We're going to be impacted significantly,' he said.
Nonprofit groups, which have often provided aid that supplemented government programs, are also under pressure. A recent survey of 200 nonprofits commissioned by three New Mexico foundations reported that 20% received at least half of their funding from federal grants -- grants that are now in jeopardy.
The Food Depot, which serves northern New Mexico, has already announced that its Regional Farm to Food Bank program is ending.
'Make absolutely no mistake,' Jill Dixon, the group's executive director, said at a recent community meeting. 'The charitable food system cannot compensate for the loss that we are facing.'
US Senator Martin Heinrich, Democrat of New Mexico.
Kayla Bartkowski/Getty
Public Lands
In a state nicknamed the Land of Enchantment for its striking landscapes and cultural history, outdoor recreation provided 29,000 jobs and generated $3.2 billion in economic impact in 2023.
Advertisement
To operate on lands controlled by the Bureau of Land Management or the Forest Service, it is necessary to have permits, adequate access points and working restrooms and campgrounds, said Nick Streit, whose father opened the Taos Fly Shop in 1980.
But among the federal workers who lost their jobs in the first rounds of layoffs were several who worked on recreation and permitting. Those workers, Streit said, usually bought their waders and other outdoor equipment at local businesses and supported the local guide industry by maintaining standards.
'Those permits are important, because when members of the public come and they hire somebody, they know they're safe, they have insurance, they have training,' said Streit, who is also the executive director of Friends of the Rio Grande del Norte National Monument.
Will Blackstock, who owns Far Flung Adventures, which offers white-water rafting trips on the Rio Grande, said that at the beginning of this summer, 'things were looking very bleak' as a result of the federal budget and staffing cuts, with a significant reduction in the number of river rangers who patrol the nearby Rio Chama, a major tributary of the Rio Grande. One more ranger has been added back since then.
'It's far less than the river program needs, but it is better than we thought it was going to be,' Blackstock said.
Conservation group leaders said they were relieved that a plan by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, to sell millions of acres of public lands was abandoned after intense pushback, including from many of Trump's supporters.
Advertisement
But Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins did rescind a long-standing rule prohibiting road construction and timber harvesting in remote areas of federal forests, which conservationists fear will threaten vulnerable species and compromise wilderness values on public lands. The announcement was made in Santa Fe.
'We are so on edge right now, I can't even tell you,' said Garrett VeneKlasen, the northern conservation director of the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance.
Natural Disasters
In New Mexico, concerns often turn to the basics: fire and water. Summers are drier now and extreme heat more frequent, heightening wildfire concerns.
Jane Lumsden, whose family has long owned a natural foods store in Las Vegas, New Mexico, lost her custom-built home in the devastating Calf Canyon-Hermit's Peak blaze in 2022. But she is grateful to the experts who predicted the fire's path and to the emergency responders who kept residents regularly apprised of fire dangers.
Otherwise, she said, 'People most certainly would have died.'
Now, as her family incorporates timber salvaged from their burned home to rebuild across the street, she is worried that the federal cuts could affect reforestation efforts and could make it more difficult to fill thousands of vacant firefighter jobs. The Federal Emergency Management Agency has also lost a quarter of its full-time staff since Trump took office.
'Climate and natural disasters are accelerating and without these kinds of warning systems and support, we will be at risk,' she said. 'Look what happened in Texas.'
About 60 miles to the northwest in Chimayo, Champe Green, an elected member of the Santa Fe-Pojoaque Soil and Water Conservation District, worries often about the earthen Cañada De Ancha Dam, one of the state's most dangerous.
Advertisement
Champe Green near the earthen Canada De Ancha Dam in Chimayo, N.M.
MERIDITH KOHUT/NYT
Built 60 years ago, the dam has retention ponds that are now so choked with sediment that any significant rainfall could cause overflowing or breaching. An estimated 1,000 people, many of them poor and working-class, live within the potential flood area, according to the federal Department of Agriculture.
The state has pledged $8 million to remove the sediment. That funding is contingent, however, on a federal match of roughly $11 million. Congress is considering the appropriation of up to $7 million in watershed rehabilitation funding for the next fiscal year -- for the entire country.
'There's not enough to pay for our one little project, much less all the projects around the country,' said Green, a retired biologist and ecologist with the U.S. Forest Service and the Army Corps of Engineers.
And now it is monsoon season.
'If we got 2 inches in an hour, that would be scary,' he said. 'If we had 4 inches in 24 hours, I'd be scared to death.'
Arts, Culture and Native Americans
Robert K. Meya, general director of the Santa Fe Opera, has his own concerns related to wildfire threats.
The opera's annual insurance rates doubled from 2024 to 2025. With its open-air productions each summer, performed against a breathtaking desert backdrop, the opera has installed air-quality sensors to gauge whether it is safe to perform.
'If you cut off the funding for the Forest Service and you're not maintaining these forests correctly,' Meya said, 'then the possibility for a fire will only increase significantly.'
Apprentices rehearsed at the Santa Fe Opera.
MERIDITH KOHUT/NYT
In recent months, a $55,000 federal grant for this summer's premiere of Richard Wagner's 'Die Walküre' has been rescinded (though it is being appealed). And $100,000 spent on installing solar panels, which previously would have been eligible for tax credits under the Inflation Reduction Act, may never be recouped.
Similar concerns weigh on organizations catering to the arts, education and Native Americans.
Rose Eason, a board member of Creative New Mexico, an arts advocacy nonprofit, said at least $1.5 million in federal grants earmarked for two dozen organizations statewide had been terminated.
Southwestern Indian Polytechnic Institute -- one of only two federally run colleges for Native Americans -- is facing a proposed 83% cut in federal funding.
And the impending cuts to public broadcasting could shrink funding by 20% for KSUT, one of the country's first tribal radio stations. It provides Indigenous news, music and emergency alerts to rural northwestern New Mexico.
'It's one giant ecosystem,' Meya said. 'No one is immune.'
This article originally appeared in
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time Magazine
an hour ago
- Time Magazine
Why Stocks Keeps Rising—Despite Trump's Tariff Chaos
As America hikes tariffs sharply, the jobs market slips, and President Donald Trump turns his ire from Harvard to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the stock market refuses to collapse. Despite these economic speed bumps, the S&P 500 Index is up nearly 8% so far this year. How long this rise can continue depends on whether the fundamental strength of the U.S. economy can withstand the wrenching transformation to the global trading system that President Trump has forced. Economics textbooks insist that stock prices reflect the future stream of a company's profits on any given day. For all the brainpower devoted to these forecasts, however, they are essentially rough estimates of what may happen over the next twelve months and wild guesses about anything after that. Over the past several weeks, more companies than usual reported second-quarter results that beat market expectations, and analysts have even slightly raised their estimates for the next three months. Market valuations are higher than historical averages (about 22 times forward earnings) But the bulls argue that this includes those transformative tech firms that will reap handsome rewards from the artificial intelligence revolution. Read More: The Chaotic, Fantastical World of Donald Trump's Tariffs That's all pretty reasonable for an economy that has grown on average 2.8% for the last five years, recovering nicely from COVID-19 lockdowns, powering through the sharpest interest rate increases in 40 years, and still going strong as the president fundamentally redesigns the global trading order. Generous checks and rock-bottom interest rates following the pandemic may explain at least some of this remarkable performance. Still, stocks are all about future expectations, and none of this history reveals much about the impact of the Trump Administration's dramatic policy departures. The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' locked in lower corporate tax rates and delivered a massive boost to defense spending, adding some $3.4 trillion to the deficit over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The administration promises, however, that together with a wave of deregulation, growth rates will be more than 1% higher over the next four years. That would be quite something, but most independent economists expect more headwinds from tariffs than tailwinds from tax cuts and deregulation. The International Monetary Fund recently raised global growth forecasts to 3.1% this year—but doesn't expect more than 2% in the U.S. in 2025 or 2026. The problem is that tariffs represent a large stealth tax increase as average rates rise from 2.5% to nearly 20%, depending on what goods are ultimately covered. Not all prices will rise by this much as imports represent just over 10% of the economy, and many companies will absorb some of the higher costs. Still, the $300 billion in tariff revenues that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent expects this year will be paid by Americans. Worse than this one-off blow, however, is the lingering uncertainty for investors and corporate strategists. Even as Trump's tariffs went into effect on Aug. 7, crucial details of the deals he has announced remain unknown. Meanwhile, Trump has promised more tariffs on pharmaceuticals and semiconductors. And even if pending court cases force him to backtrack on some tariffs, his 'Truth Social' threats of tariffs to pressure Brazilian prosecutors or block India's purchases of Russian oil will keep everyone on their backfoot. Read More: Trump's Decision to Fire BLS Commissioner Echoes Putin's Strategies There's also a big question around Chinese imports, many of which could see tariffs snap back to 145% if the current truce is not extended beyond Aug. 12. Negotiators signaled they might extend the deadline, working towards an agreement that Trump and China's president Xi Jinping could endorse at a fall summit. Then, the White House walked back this suggestion. Indeed, it doesn't take much more than a weather balloon to derail this fragile relationship. Markets delivered a bone-chilling response to Trump's initial 'Liberation Day' tariff announcements in early April with a simultaneous sell-off of U.S. stocks, treasury bonds, and the dollar. If that news came as a jolt, today's rocketing stock prices suggest investors believe the economy can handle higher costs and persistent uncertainty. Or they believe the Fed will be cutting rates soon. But the real test will come in the fall when goods with their new post-tariff price tags start arriving in stores. Will they bring another burst of inflation that the Fed has to fight with delayed rate cuts? Could they damage the holiday spirits of American shoppers and raise the risks of recession? Still worse, might we see both? If a U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, escalating fighting in Ukraine, and the president's persistent attacks on the Fed aren't enough to derail this market, it could be a burst of 1970s-style 'stagflation' that does the trick.


Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: Gerrymandering now truly is a dangerous threat to American democracy
'If the United States is to deter a nuclear attack,' then-U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara said in a 1967 speech in San Francisco, 'it must possess an actual and a credible assured-destruction capability.' McNamara was elucidating a long-established defense concept known as 'mutually assured destruction,' meaning that if one side has the ability to destroy its enemy but knows that it cannot do so without being destroyed itself, and that its enemy can and will act to do precisely that, stability is the result. Something like that argument is being applied to gerrymandering, which is applying nuclear-level destruction to American democracy at both state and federal levels. And it is proliferating. California Gov. Gavin Newsom used the phrase 'fight fire with fire' when he said he planned to work with the California legislature and congressional representatives on a plan that would temporarily set aside California's independent redistricting commission. The aim is to draw a map that would offset any gains the GOP makes in Texas, where President Donald Trump and Gov. Greg Abbott are trying to force a gerrymandered, mid-decade congressional map through the Texas legislature with the aim of maintaining Republican control of the U.S. House. That action in Texas, of course, explains why Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker was holding a news conference this week with Texas Democrats who had fled the Lone Star State to try to prevent, well, their own mutually assured destruction. After other Texans in exile made their way to New York City for a separate news conference, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said that 'if Republicans are willing to rewrite these rules to give themselves an advantage, then they're leaving us no choice, we must do the same.' Closer to home, Pritzker assailed what was happening in Texas as a 'corrupt' act, likely to 'silence millions of voters,' with nary a sense of irony, as if his own party was squeaky clean on the matter in Illinois, which is hardly the case. Illinois Republicans, or what is left of them, roared at the hypocrisy, given that the Illinois version of gerrymandering, as egregiously implemented in 2021, has effectively disempowered Republicans, and thus Republican voters, to the point that very few of them even see a point in running for office in Illinois districts anymore, beyond the safe Republican islands. That's despite 44% of Illinoisans voting for Trump in 2024. The problem with applying the language of assured mutual destruction is that democracy does not die in a nuclear flash, to be avoided at all costs. It dies progressively, eaten away by incremental loss of trust. The Illinois State Fair, which began Thursday in Springfield, is typically the kickoff of the new political season. But this year serious Republican candidates in districts now held by Democrats are outnumbered not just by cows but maybe even the one made of butter. Party representatives tell us that donors can read maps with impossible odds like anyone else and thus no longer see much point in supporting Republican efforts in Illinois. They feel their money is better spent on races outside the state, the competitiveness of which are now being undermined by Trump and his cronies in Texas and elsewhere. Indiana appears to be next. Vice President JD Vance already has met with the Indiana governor and Republican legislative leaders, reportedly to 'discuss ways to strengthen the GOP's House majority ahead of the 2026 midterms.' The vice president would have been better advised to stand for fair and impartial maps in the Hoosier State and beyond. He should be shouting out for democracy, loud and clear. We've railed against gerrymandering on both state and federal levels before, of course, and not just to lament the cowardice on gerrymandering displayed by the Illinois Supreme Court, as well the U.S. Supreme Court's lamentable 2019 decision in Rucho v. Common Cause that removed federal courts as a crucial check on partisan gerrymandering. At the time, Chief Justice John Roberts clearly recognized the threat gerrymandering posed to democracy, but the 5-4 court majority he led ruled that the only lawful remedies were political, as distinct from federal judicial intervention. Already that decision has not aged well. We're with Justice Elena Kagan, who wrote in her dissent: 'The practices challenged in these cases imperil our system of government. Part of the Court's role in that system is to defend its foundations.' If not that, then what else is the court for? We're back on the topic today to say that the events of the last few days only have deepened our conviction that gerrymandering is a real and present threat to American democracy that must be stopped before yet more damage is done. We also are here to say that phrases like 'fire with fire' and 'all's fair in love and war' are nothing more than lazy, partisan thinking, tempting as they may be to utter. So we were glad to hear Rep. Mark Lawler of New York say on CNN Tuesday that he thought what his fellow Republicans were doing in Texas was 'wrong.' A voice in the wilderness perhaps, but a voice nonetheless. 'We have to actually have neutral districts across this country,' Lawler told the news outlet. 'It would serve the country better.' Ya think? In a separate interview with PBS, wherein he strikingly echoed the arguments in Kagan's dissent from 2019, Lawler allowed that 'both sides have been guilty' of gerrymandering. 'We should have competitive districts based on communities of interest, and ultimately the voters, not the politicians, should decide who is in the majority,' he said. Such a novel concept. Lawson has said he plans to introduce legislation that would 'outright ban gerrymandering.' Good for him. We hope to be able to support that. We think all Americans with a sense of fairness should do the same. Erudite cynics like Karl Rove have written that gerrymandering has been around as long as there have been politicians and districts and that public officials invariably become inured to their own hypocrisy. . Perhaps. But such is the frighteningly rapid deterioration of structural fairness within the American political system these last few months, thanks mostly to a craven administration that sees everything as a zero-sum game and its singular ability to bring out the worst in its opponents, that surely some who have failed to see the clear and present dangers might wake up. Even if that means acting against their own short-term interests. This isn't about one side laying down its arms, or refusing to do so. It's about building a structure with bipartisan buy-in so both are able to do so at once. We like to believe that could still be done in America.


Chicago Tribune
an hour ago
- Chicago Tribune
Clarence Page: Time for Democrats to get serious about their political future
Gee, what's happened to the 'silly season' of U.S. politics? That's what many of us in the daily journalism trades used to call the periods, usually in late summer or near holidays, when news media put an unusually intense focus on lighthearted or frivolous storiesbecause of a shortage of more serious news. We currently have no such shortage. Even late-breaking investigations and speculation surrounding the suicide of President Donald Trump's late acquaintance Jeffrey Epstein have had to compete with a ferocious partisan war within some of the states over redistricting. Consider Texas, where Republicans in the state legislature are attempting, at Trump's urging, to redraw congressional districts in order to flip five more districts to Republican majorities. Democratic legislators fled the state to deny the legislature a quorum, in hopes of preventing Republicans from carrying out their plan. Some have taken refuge in Illinois, leading Texas Republicans to call for their arrest by the FBI. Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has vowed to protect them. 'Donald Trump is trying to steal five seats from the people — frankly, of the country, not just the people of Texas — and disenfranchise people,' Pritzker said on 'The Late Show with Stephen Colbert.' 'We're talking about violating the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution.' Pritzker also declined to turn away from the possibility of a mid-decade congressional remap in his own state. He told Colbert: 'It's possible. I've said everything is on the table. We've gotta fight fire with fire.' Are we starting to see the hardball attitude that many frustrated Democrats have been urging their national party to adopt? Still smarting from the debacle of Joe Biden's 2024 candidacy and the subsequent defeat of the Kamala Harris-Tim Walz ticket, Democrats appear increasingly ready to face a real threat to their ability to regain power in 2026 and beyond. For their part, Republicans are not trying to hide their determination to gerrymander their way out of a midterm backlash in November 2026. Vice President JD Vance visited Indiana to urge lawmakers to redraw their congressional map. It's already a reliably Republican-voting state, but it appears the GOP wants to leave nothing to chance. I find it to be no small irony that these battle lines are being drawn on the 60th anniversary of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Some of us are old enough to remember the feeling that a new page in American history had been turned when that law was enacted. We believed that it would finally end the denial and dilution of Black voting power. That dream, once won, now must be defended once again. Frankly, it's been a never-ending chore. The last time House Democrats held the majority, they introduced a sweeping package of good-government reforms, including a centerpiece legislation to end partisan gerrymandering. 'The people should choose their politicians,' then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in 2021 before the House passed the For the People Act, which would later die in the Senate. 'Politicians should not be choosing their voters.' Of course, choosing their voters is precisely what Trump and Republican legislatures intend to do. Trump's team has pushed Republicans to redraw maps 'wherever redistricting is an option.' Democrats can't afford to respond with anything less. Indeed, some Democrats, such as California Gov. Gavin Newsom, are switching from their past lofty positions in favor of bipartisan redistricting commissions to embracing the idea of fighting fire with fire. Pelosi, who remains a member of the U.S. House, said that while Democrats favor nationwide independent commissions to draw congressional district maps, 'Democrats cannot and will not unilaterally disarm.' Recent polling trends show eroding support for Trump's actions and policies, which can aptly summed up as 'reverse Robin Hood' with a police-state sideshow. This is especially the case among independents but is noticeable even among Republicans, many of whom no doubt realize their president is off the chain. A big opportunity is opening for challengers who can show voters sanity, humanity and the backbone to stand up to the schoolyard bully in the Oval Office. And Democrats have shown before that they can rise from the slough of despond to win an electoral mandate. This normally silly season has turned sinister, and the stakes to Democrats are existential. Their first step in winning back voters is showing they're willing to fight.