01-04-2025
'Pocket vetoes' could become relic of the past under change approved by NM lawmakers
Mar. 31—SANTA FE — For years, New Mexico governors have been able to kill bills without explanation by simply declining to sign them.
But the so-called "pocket veto" could be abolished starting in 2027, under a measure approved by lawmakers during this year's 60-day session.
The change, which was approved without a single "no" vote in either the House or Senate, would also have to be ratified by voters next year in order to take effect.
Rep. Matthew McQueen, D-Galisteo, on Monday described the elimination of the pocket veto as a good governance proposal.
"It really is a transparency measure," McQueen told the Journal. "The governor can obviously veto bills — we'd just like to know why."
He also said the change was not prompted by the actions of Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, who has actually pocket vetoed fewer bills than her predecessor — Republican Susana Martinez.
Another sponsor of the measure, Sen. Joseph Cervantes, D-Las Cruces, said governors have pushed back against the idea of getting rid of the pocket veto in past years, but said Lujan Grisham did not actively oppose the proposal during this year's session.
"This was not a response to any bills of mine she's vetoed," Cervantes said of the legislation. "This is just a common-sense way of improving communication."
A Lujan Grisham spokesman confirmed Monday the Democratic governor did not oppose the measure during this year's session.
"The governor's position is that this is an issue that New Mexico voters should decide on at the ballot box," the governor's spokesman Michael Coleman told the Journal.
Under the New Mexico Constitution, governors have a time period of 20 days after a legislative session ends to sign or veto most bills approved by lawmakers. Any bills that are not signed before that deadline are automatically pocket vetoed.
While the Constitution requires governors to state their objections to most vetoed bills, that requirement does not pertain to pocket vetoes.
That has long irked many legislators and advocates alike, who say it's impossible to know why a bill was not signed if the governor does not have to provide an explanation.
Specifically, McQueen said legislation he sponsored dealing with land grants was line-item vetoed three separate times by two different governors.
Under the measure approved this year by lawmakers, House Joint Resolution 2, any bills vetoed by a governor would have to be accompanied by a "substantive" explanation for the veto.
That requirement was added to ensure that veto messages feature meaningful feedback, not just perfunctory disapproval, McQueen said.
In addition, any bills not acted upon before the deadline would automatically take effect — instead of being struck down.
The number of bills pocket vetoed has varied by year and by governor, but some years have seen a large kill-off of bills by executive inaction.
In 2017, for instance, Martinez pocket vetoed 56 bills, including legislation dealing with college credits, wildlife trafficking and breast feeding policies for female inmates.
At least some of those bills were later signed into law by Lujan Grisham.
Meanwhile, the proposed change would not apply to bills approved during this year's session, which ended March 22, or during next year's 30-day legislative session.
Of the 195 bills approved by lawmakers during this year's 60-day session, Lujan Grisham had signed 24 bills and vetoed two measures, as of Monday.
She has until April 11 to act on the remaining 169 bills, which include a $10.8 billion spending plan for the coming year and a tax package approved by legislators on the session's penultimate day.
In a twist, the proposal to get rid of the pocket veto is not subject to the governor's veto pen, since it is a constitutional amendment that requires voter approval.
