CYFD reform efforts inch forward in the Roundhouse
Feb. 21—SANTA FE — One by one, New Mexico's youth, education, health and workforce secretaries lined up in a House committee room Friday to speak against an effort to overhaul the state's Children, Youth and Families Department.
Despite the opposition, the House Health and Human Services Committee voted 9-1 to enact House Joint Resolution 5, a measure that would allow voters to remove CYFD from the governor's oversight and instead create a five-member independent commission to hire a CYFD executive director by July 2027.
It's not the only CYFD reform effort the committee passed Friday. Members also voted 9-1 to pass House Bill 5, which would create an Office of the Child Advocate administratively attached to the New Mexico Department of Justice, formerly the Attorney General's Office.
"We need to do something now. We cannot continue to wait and put this off," said HJR5 bill sponsor Rep. Eleanor Chavez, D-Albuquerque.
New Mexico has long struggled to address child welfare issues, and lawmakers have increased spending on CYFD in recent years in an attempt to hire more social workers. However, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham has opposed efforts to increase outside oversight of the agency, instead ordering the creation of a new advisory council and office of innovation within CYFD.
Both pieces of legislation still need to cross over to the Senate side of the Roundhouse before getting a chance at passage, though only House Bill 5 would require the governor's signature. The efforts have failed in past years.
"CYFD welcomes accountability, oversight and partnership in improving CYFD to better serve New Mexicans, but an Office of Child Advocate attached to the Department of Justice just doesn't achieve this," CYFD Secretary Teresa Casados told the committee.
Similarly, Deputy Secretary of Protective Services and Juvenile Justice Valerie Sandoval, speaking on behalf of Casados, said other legislative proposals — not HJR5 — would help solve the agency's challenges.
"Removing CYFD as a Cabinet-level agency would hinder collaboration with key state agencies essential to child welfare, education and health," she said.
She brought up a letter child welfare advocates Judith Meltzer and Kevin Ryan sent earlier this week to Casados and Tara Ford, counsel on a settlement in a lawsuit known as Kevin S., which sought reform of New Mexico's child welfare system.
"In our view, child welfare services cannot be successfully operated in a vacuum. ... Commission-led governance is very likely, in our view, to exacerbate many of the problems we have documented in New Mexico," Meltzer and Ryan wrote, both of whom were dubbed "co-neutrals" as part of the settlement to help guide reform efforts.
Speaking as a bill expert, Alvin Sallee, a foster parent and professor emeritus for New Mexico State University's social work program, said HJR5 would remove politics from CYFD, eliminating a secretary appointee coming at the whim of any gubernatorial administration.
Under the resolution, the five commission members would be appointed staggered six-year terms by the governor, the president pro tempore of the Senate, the speaker of the House of Representatives, the minority floor leader of the Senate and the minority floor leader of the House of Representatives.
Sallee compared the setup to that of the state's Public Regulation Commission, which recently went through an overhaul to become a three-member appointed commission, all serving staggered six-year terms.Rep. Alan Martinez, R-Bernalillo, said he was dead set against HJR5 until the only ones who spoke in opposition were state Cabinet or deputy secretaries. Secretaries Mariana Padilla of the Public Education Department, who still is awaiting Senate confirmation; Kari Armijo of the Health Care Authority; Elizabeth Groginsky of the Early Childhood Education and Care Department; and Sarita Nair of the Department of Workforce Solutions also spoke against HJR5.
"It says a lot about circling the wagons and trying to protect the status quo," Martinez said.
Rep. Nicole Chavez, R-Albuquerque, voted against HJR5. She told the Journal after the committee she doesn't believe the measure would substantially improve the department; it "shifts the blame for CYFD's ineffectiveness from the Governor's Office to a politically appointed body."
"I have appreciated Secretary Casados' involvement and participation during this legislative session and hope we can reform our (Comprehensive Addiction and Recovery Act) and place safeguards to ensure New Mexico's children are protected," she said. "Our state has invested millions of dollars following the Kevin S. lawsuit and yet CYFD continues to fail our children."
Rep. Pamelya Herndon, D-Albuquerque, was the sole vote against HB5. She asked a few clarifying questions on the bill during the discussion but didn't explain her "no" vote afterward. She's also a sponsor of HJR5.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
26 minutes ago
- Business Insider
What A-list economists are saying about Trump's tax bill as Musk rebels against it
Elon Musk has departed his role as a "special government employee" in Trump's White House — and he's using his time outside the administration to hammer the GOP spending bill that's a cornerstone of the president's agenda. "This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination," Musk wrote on X earlier this week. Trump responded by saying Musk's criticism of the legislation is "disappointing." President Trump's tax bill will likely face a vote in the Senate in the coming weeks after passing the House in May. It would reduce the tax rates of lower-income workers, particularly those earning less than $107,200, and eliminate taxes on tips, social security, and overtime. The bill would also cut spending on social programs like Medicaid and SNAP benefits, which provide food assistance to low-income Americans. Like Musk, investors and economists are seemingly concerned that the bill will cause the national debt to balloon and further widen the US budget deficit. The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said this week that it would grow the deficit by $2.4 trillion over the next decade . Trump and his allies have pushed back, arguing that higher economic growth from lower taxes would help boost government revenue. Here's what top economists are saying about the bill. Phillip L. Swagel, director of the Congressional Budget Office Despite the lower tax rates for low earners, Swagel said in a May 20 letter that the bill would negatively impact poorer Americans. "CBO estimates that household resources would decrease by an amount equal to about 2 percent of income in the lowest decile (tenth) of the income distribution in 2027 and 4 percent in 2033, mainly as a result of losses of in-kind transfers, such as Medicaid and SNAP," he wrote. "By contrast, resources would increase by an amount equal to 4 percent for households in the highest decile in 2027 and 2 percent in 2033, mainly because of reductions in the taxes they owe." William McBride, chief economist at the Tax Foundation McBride, along with several colleagues at the non-partisan Tax Foundation think tank, said in a May 23 report that while the bill would support economic growth, it wouldn't be enough to offset the revenue loss from tax cuts. "Our preliminary analysis finds the tax provisions included in the House-passed bill would increase long-run GDP by 0.8 percent," the report said. "The bill's tax and spending changes would increase the 10-year budget deficit by $2.6 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the deficit would increase by $1.7 trillion over ten years before interest costs." It continued: "The bill's tax provisions alone would reduce federal tax revenue by $4.1 trillion from 2025 through 2034 on a conventional basis before added interest costs. On a dynamic basis, accounting for economic growth, the revenue reduction would fall by nearly 22 percent to $3.2 trillion over 10 years before added interest costs." 6 Nobel Laureates Six Nobel Prize-winning economists — including Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Peter Diamond, Paul Krugman, Oliver Hart, and Joseph Stiglitz — said in a June 2 letter that the bill would worsen wealth inequality in the US. "The combination of cuts to key safety net programs like Medicaid and SNAP and tax cuts disproportionately benefiting higher-income households means that the House budget constitutes an extremely large upward redistribution of income. Given how much this bill adds to the U.S. debt, it is shocking that it still imposes absolute losses on the bottom 40% of U.S households," the letter said. "The House bill addresses none of the nation's key economic challenges usefully and exacerbates many of them," it added. Ken Rogoff, professor of economics at Harvard University Rogoff, former chief economist at the IMF, cast doubt on the notion that the bill would boost growth in a piece for Project Syndicate this week. "Trump and his acolytes argue that his "big, beautiful bill" will supercharge economic growth, generating enough revenue to make up for sweeping tax cuts. But history offers little support for such claims," he wrote. "While both Democratic-led spending sprees and Republican-backed tax cuts have fueled the growth of US debt over the past two decades, tax reductions have accounted for the lion's share of the increase. Moreover, the notion that tax cuts pay for themselves was already discredited in the 1980s, when President Ronald Reagan's tax cuts led to soaring deficits rather than self-sustaining growth." He added: "Will America's rising debt ultimately trigger a full-blown crisis? Perhaps, but a continued upward drift in long-term interest rates is more likely." Desmond Lachman, senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute Lachman, a former IMF official who currently works for a conservative-leaning think tank, said in a June 4 post that rising bond yields, a declining dollar, and appreciating gold prices could be harbingers of an economic crisis brought on by Trump-driven policy volatility. Trump's tax bill is adding to investors' fears due to its inflationary implications. But one of its clauses undermines confidence in the reliability of the returns on Treasurys, he said. "That bill includes a clause that has to be sending shivers down foreign investors' spines. According to Section 899, the US Treasury can impose additional taxes of up to 20 percent on income earned by foreign entities from countries that enact taxes deemed 'unfair' to US interests."
Epoch Times
27 minutes ago
- Epoch Times
House Democrats Fall Short in Subpoenaing Elon Musk in 20–21 Vote
House Democrats on Thursday couldn't get enough votes to issue a subpoena to tech entrepreneur Elon Musk to testify before Congress. The House Oversight Committee rejected the Democrats' request for Musk, a Trump adviser and former head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), to appear before lawmakers in a 20–21 vote.
33 minutes ago
Here are taxes that Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' would repeal
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act that is now in the Senate would pay for President Donald Trump's campaign promises to make his 2017 tax cuts permanent, cut other taxes and boost spending for border security and defense. Republican fiscal hawks say they can't vote for the bill in its current state because it will add to the deficit -- by $2.4 trillion, according to a Congressional Budget estimate released Wednesday. In addition to no tax on tips and no tax on overtime, the bill would also repeal federal excise taxes on gun silencers and tanning services. Here's a breakdown of those cuts in the current form of the bill: Making Trump tax cuts permanent: Because this is an extension of cuts in place since 2017, the average taxpayer would largely not see a change, unless the cuts were not renewed. No tax on tips and overtime: This was one of Trump's major campaign promises -- exempting workers who receive tips from paying federal income taxes on them, as long as they make less than $160,000 a year. The same income threshold would apply to exemptions for overtime pay and there is no cap on how much OT pay workers could claim. Both tax breaks would expire at the end of 2028 after Trump leaves office. Trump savings accounts: The bill creates so-called 'Trump savings accounts' for parents to open for their newborn children. The contribution limit for any taxable year is $5,000. The government would provide an initial deposit of $1,000 for each newborn. Raising the SALT cap: The bill raises the tax deduction limit for state and local taxes from $10,000 to $40,000 for joint filers making less than $500,000 per year. The cap would increase by 1% each year. Republicans from states with high taxes like New York and California pushed House GOP leadership to further increase that cap to give their constituents a break. Fiscal hard-liners in the House warned that increasing the cap would increase the deficit. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has already signaled that the cap that came out of the House probably won't survive in the Senate. On the campaign trail, Trump promised to eliminate the SALT cap first imposed by the 2017 tax law he signed during his first term. Removing gun silencer tax: The bill would end the $200 excise tax imposed on the purchase or transfer of silencers and eliminate registration. The tax has been on the books since Congress passed the National Firearms Act in 1934. This is a major win for the National Rifle Association. Repealing tax on indoor tanning: The legislation would repeal the excise tax on indoor tanning services. The 10% tax was included in the Affordable Care Act and has been in place since 2010. Cuts to green energy incentives: The bill would reduce or eliminate green energy tax credits and other incentives that were hallmarks of President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act. Tax credits for homeowners who purchase solar panels, wind turbines, geothermal heat pumps, energy efficient windows, and more would be eliminated. For solar and wind power, for example, homeowners are currently eligible for a tax credit worth 30% of the cost of the purchase. The bill also eliminates tax credits for those who purchase new or used electric vehicles -- up to $4,000 for a used EV and $7,500 for new. It also ends a tax incentive for homes and businesses to install EV charging stations. If the bill becomes law, these incentives and others would end at the end of this year. Slashing education programs: The bill would slash $330 billion from student loan spending over the next 10 years. An income-based 'Repayment Assistance Plan' will be the new standard for student loans. It also changes the Pell Grant program for low-income students by increasing the increasing the number of required credits per semester.
