FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS PROVIDED BY THE MCCUNE CHARITABLE FOUNDATION.

AND VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

Gene: THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, CORPORATE LEADERS ADDRESS CONCERNS FROM NEW MEXICANS AHEAD OF A POTENTIALLY HISTORIC PUBLIC UTILITY MERGER.

Pedro: THAT’S WHAT WE WANT TO DO, TO CREATE THE HUB IN NEW MEXICO THAT THE EMPLOYMENT, THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, REMAINS THERE.

Gene: AND, BLURRING LINES BETWEEN RELIGION AND GOVERNMENT.

WHY A NEW MEXICO PASTOR IS AT THE CENTER OF A NATIONAL DISCUSSION ON THE CHURCH’S INFLUENCE ON POLITICS.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS NOW Gene: THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK.

I’M YOUR HOST, GENE GRANT.

NEW MEXICO’S OWN, U.S.

INTERIOR SECRETARY DEB HAALAND, IS MAKING A NATIONAL PUSH TO REMOVE DEROGATORY AND CULTURALLY INSENSITIVE NAMES FROM FEDERAL LANDS.

OUR LINE OPINION PANEL DIGS INTO WHY IT’S HAPPENING NOW.

PLUS, ENVIRONMENT REPORTER LAURA PASKUS SITS DOWN WITH EXECUTIVES INVOLVED IN A POTENTIAL MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR PUBLIC UTILITY MERGER THAT COULD HAVE BIG IMPLICATIONS FOR CITIZENS ACROSS THE STATE.

AND AGAIN, MAKING HEADLINES IN OUR STATE AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY, COVID-19.

HOSPITALIZATIONS HAVE INCREASED DRAMATICALLY IN THE LAST MONTH.

RIGHT NOW, 633 PATIENTS WITH COVID-19 ARE BEING CARED FOR IN NEW MEXICO HOSPITALS.

THAT'S UP 72% FROM NOVEMBER 1ST WHEN THERE WERE JUST 368.

IT’S FORCED SOME HOSPITALS SYSTEMS TO INSTITUTE CRISIS STANDARDS OF CARE, ALLOWING MORE FLEXIBILITY IN SHIFTING RESOURCES TO HELP TAKE CARE OF THOSE PATIENTS.

NOW, ACCORDING TO THE STATE HEALTH DEPARTMENT’S MOST RECENT COVID-19 BRIEFING EARLIER THIS WEEK, THERE'S SOME CAUSE FOR CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM.

THE SPREAD RATE HAS FALLEN BELOW ONE, MEANING FOR A SINGLE INFECTED PERSON, FEWER THAN ONE OTHER INDIVIDUAL IS CONTRACTING THE VIRUS.

BUT HEALTH LEADERS ARE URGING PEOPLE NOT TO BECOME COMPLACENT.

STATE DOCTORS SAY AWARENESS AND PRECAUTIONS ARE THE MAIN REASONS THE SPREAD HAS SLOWED.

AND WITH THE NEW OMICRON VARIANT YET TO BE IDENTIFIED IN OUR STATE, THE POSSIBILITY FOR ANOTHER SPIKE REMAINS.

THE VIRUS IS ALSO FORCING SOME CHANGES FOR STATE GOVERNMENT, AS WELL, IN THE NEW MEXICO LEGISLATURE AS THEY PREPARE TO BEGIN A SPECIAL SESSION.

I SPOKE WITH THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR SENATE DEMOCRATS ABOUT WHAT WOULD BE DIFFERENT, BOTH FOR LAWMAKERS AND CITIZENS.

Gene: WITH COVID, CASES ARE, OF COURSE, COMING UP AROUND THE STATE.

THE NUMBERS ARE NOT THAT GREAT.

BUT THE CAPITOL IS STAYING OPEN FOR THE PUBLIC.

BUT THERE'S SOME NEW PROCEDURES.

COULD YOU BRUSH US UP ON WHAT THOSE ARE?

Chris: CERTAINLY, YES.

AND AS YOU SAID, GENE, COVID IS STILL VERY MUCH WITH US.

SO THE GOAL FOR THIS SESSION IS TO GET THE WORK DONE, BUT TO DO IT IN A WAY THAT KEEPS THE PUBLIC, MEMBERS, AND STAFF AT THE ROUNDHOUSE SAFE.

SO THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SERVICE JUST RECENTLY ANNOUNCED THAT IN ORDER FOR THE PUBLIC TO ATTEND IN PERSON AT THE ROUNDHOUSE, PROOF OF VACCINATION WILL HAVE TO BE SHOWN UPON ENTRY.

AND I CAN GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK.

BUT IF THE PUBLIC WANTS TO COME INTO THE BUILDING, THEY HAVE TO SHOW PROOF OF FULL VACCINATION.

Gene: LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION.

WHEN YOU SAY FULL VACCINATION, DOES THAT INCLUDE A BOOSTER?

Chris: I BELIEVE AS LONG AS YOU -- YOU KNOW, THEY'RE SAYING FOR THE PFIZER AND THE MODERNA VACCINES, SIX MONTHS REALLY IS THE TIME FOR EFFICACY, AND THEN BEYOND THAT SIX MONTHS IS WHEN THE BOOSTER IS RECOMMENDED.

SO I BELIEVE AS LONG AS IT'S BEEN WITHIN THE PREVIOUS SIX MONTHS -- I'LL HAVE TO VERIFY THAT, BUT THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED FULL VACCINATION.

BUT THEY WILL LOOK TO SEE IF PEOPLE HAVE BOOSTERS, IF THEY ARE NEEDED BY THEN.

Gene: LAWMAKERS, ARE THEY GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO BE VACCINATED, AS WELL?

Chris: THEY ACTUALLY CAN'T, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE.

THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL SERVICE CANNOT MANDATE THAT LEGISLATORS GET THE VACCINE.

THEY'RE CONSIDERED CONSTITUTIONAL LAW OFFICERS AND THEY'RE OUTSIDE OF THE PURVIEW.

BUT OBVIOUSLY IT IS HIGHLY ENCOURAGED THAT LEGISLATORS, TOO, ARE VACCINATED AND BOOSTED WHEN THEY CAN BE.

Gene: LAST TIME AROUND, THERE WAS A PRETTY GOOD ROUND OF SOCIAL DISTANCING AND MASKING IN THE LEGISLATURE.

ARE WE TO EXPECT THAT AGAIN, AS WELL, FOR LAWMAKERS?

MASKING DEFINITELY.

MASKS WILL STILL BE REQUIRED THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING.

AND AS FAR AS SOCIAL DISTANCING, I THINK THE BARRICADES IN THE CHAMBERS ARE STILL UP, THE PLEXIGLASS.

YOU KNOW, FORTUNATELY THE ROUNDHOUSE IS A PRETTY GOOD-SIZED BUILDING, SO I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK THAT IT'S GOING TO BE REALLY CROWDED.

BUT WE'LL BE KEEPING AN EYE ON THE SIZE, AND ASK THAT PEOPLE DO CONTINUE TO ADHERE TO SOME SOCIAL DISTANCING.

Gene: WE'RE TALKING TO CHRIS NORDSTRUM.

HE'S THE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR FOR NEW MEXICO SENATE DEMOCRATS IN THE ROUNDHOUSE.

CHRIS, I HAVE A QUESTION.

ANY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROCEDURES IN THE SENATE AND THE HOUSE THAT YOU'RE AWARE OF?

Chris: NOT REALLY.

AS I SAID, THE ROUNDHOUSE IS OPEN, BUT ONE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE IS IN SOME SENSE, THIS SESSION WILL BE THE MOST OPEN OF ANY SESSION, BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THE ROUNDHOUSE OPEN FOR PEOPLE TO COME IN, ASSUMING THEY'RE VACCINATED, BUT THE LAST SESSION, THE BUILDING WAS CLOSED BUT THE SESSION WAS OPEN VIA TECHNOLOGY, AND THAT WILL CONTINUE.

SO IF SOMEONE CAN'T OR CHOOSES NOT TO COME INTO THE ROUNDHOUSE, THEY'LL STILL BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE VIA ZOOM, ATTEND COMMITTEE MEETINGS, HAVE THEIR VOICES BE HEARD.

YOU KNOW, THE DETAILS OF HOW THAT WORKS IN EACH CHAMBER MIGHT DIFFER SLIGHTLY, BUT FOR THE MOST PART THE PROCEDURES ARE PRETTY MUCH THE SAME AND BOTH SIDES WILL BE OPERATING THE SAME.

LEGISLATORS WILL BE ATTENDING IN PERSON.

UNLESS THERE ARE EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES FOR HEALTH REASONS, I BELIEVE ALL THE LEGISLATORS WILL BE IN PERSON IN BOTH CHAMBERS.

Gene: INTERESTING POINTS THERE.

THIS IS THE FIRST SESSION WE'VE HAD SINCE THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL VOTED TO BAN FIREARMS FROM THE ROUNDHOUSE, NOT WITHOUT CONTROVERSY.

WE COVERED IT A LOT ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS, CERTAINLY.

HOW WILL THAT CHANGE HOW PEOPLE ENTER THE CAPITOL BUILDING?

IS THERE A PROTOCOL SET UP FOR THAT NOW?

Chris: YES, THERE IS.

SO THAT, COUPLED WITH THE VACCINE CHECK, WILL DEFINITELY CHANGE THE WAY PEOPLE COME INTO THE BUILDING.

I BELIEVE -- SOME OF THESE DETAILS ARE STILL BEING WORKED OUT, BUT I THINK THE PLAN IS THERE WILL BE FOUR ENTRANCES TO THE CAPITOL.

SO FOUR DIFFERENT WAYS PEOPLE CAN COME IN.

AND WHEN YOU ENTER, THERE WILL ACTUALLY BE TWO SEPARATE CHECKPOINTS.

ONE WILL BE THE VACCINE CHECK, AND THEN THE SECOND WILL BE THE SECURITY CHECK.

SO THERE WILL BE METAL DETECTORS AND POTENTIAL BAG SEARCHES BEFORE YOU CAN ACTUALLY COME ALL THE WAY INTO THE BUILDING.

Gene: ANY BACKLASH ON THIS NEW PROTOCOL THAT YOU'VE BEEN DEALING WITH ON THE SENATE SIDE?

WHAT'S BEEN THE REACTION SO FAR?

Chris: ON BOTH ISSUES, I THINK FOR THE MOST PART PEOPLE ARE EXTREMELY SUPPORTIVE OF IT.

I MEAN, WE KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, COVID IS STILL VERY MUCH IN CONTROL, SADLY.

I THINK YESTERDAY IT WAS REPORTED THERE WERE 633 PEOPLE HOSPITALIZED RIGHT NOW IN NEW MEXICO.

AND WHILE WE HAVE A GOOD VACCINATION RATE, I THINK WE'RE JUST SHY OF 75% FULL VACCINATION IN THE STATE, THAT 25% UNVACCINATED IS STILL A LOT OF FOLKS.

SO I THINK IN TERMS OF SAFETY FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED, THE RULE IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED AND I THINK WELL ACCEPTED.

SAME FOR THE WEAPONS BAN.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, IT IS THE WORLD WE'RE LIVING IN TODAY, AND I THINK FOR THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF EVERYBODY IN THE ROUNDHOUSE, IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE THIS IN PLACE.

Gene: REPUBLICAN CHAIRMAN STEVAN PEARCE HAD A QUOTE THAT SANTA FE NEW MEXICAN COLUMNIST MILAN SIMONICH QUOTED JUST A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, BASICALLY SAYING THAT THE PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS ARE ONCE AGAIN TRYING TO HIDE BEHIND THESE PROTOCOLS TO KEEP THE PUBLIC'S NEED TO KNOW AT BAY.

WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

Chris: ABSOLUTELY NOT.

AS I MENTIONED BEFORE, I THINK IN MANY WAYS THIS UPCOMING SESSION IS MORE OPEN THAN PREVIOUS SESSIONS IN TERMS OF ACCESS TO THE BUILDING BOTH PHYSICALLY AND VIRTUALLY.

SO IT'S OPEN, TRANSPARENT.

THE PUBLIC IS INVITED TO ATTEND IN WHATEVER WAY THEY'RE ABLE TO, AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO MAKE FOR A VERY TRANSPARENT AND OPEN SESSION.

Gene: YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO TAKE -- IN MY MIND'S EYE, AS SOMEONE WHO, LIKE A LOT OF US, TRY TO GET IN THE ROUNDHOUSE DURING THE SESSION TO DO OUR WORK AND STUFF, I CAN IMAGINE SOME PRETTY SERIOUS LINES OR SOME PRETTY SERIOUS DELAYS, POSSIBLY, AT THE START OF COMMITTEE HEARING TIMES.

THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT COULD BE COMPROMISED HERE.

HOW PREPARED IS THE SENATE SIDE FOR THAT EVENTUALITY, THAT IT MIGHT BE IMPACTFUL ON THE CLOCK, LITERALLY, ON THE DAY-TO-DAY CLOCK?

Chris: THAT'S A VERY GOOD QUESTION, AND I THINK IN SOME WAYS THE SPECIAL WILL ACTUALLY GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF A PRACTICE ROUND FOR THE REGULAR SESSION COME JANUARY, BECAUSE THE SPECIAL IS REALLY FOCUSED ON REDISTRICTING.

THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF ISSUES.

THAT DOESN'T MEAN THERE WON'T BE PEOPLE INTERESTED IN COMING INTO THE BUILDING.

WE CERTAINLY EXPECT THAT.

BUT I THINK FOR THE SPECIAL SESSION, THERE PROBABLY WON'T BE LARGE CROWDS, I WOULD JUST IMAGINE.

SO I THINK THIS WILL GIVE US A GOOD OPPORTUNITY AND CHANCE TO SEE, OKAY, HOW IS THE FLOW LOOKING?

ARE THERE THE RIGHT NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN PLACE TO TAKE CARE OF THE LINES, ETC.?

AND THEN WHEN JANUARY ROLLS AROUND AND MORE PEOPLE ARE PRESUMEDLY COMING IN, I THINK THOSE ARE CONSIDERATIONS THAT WILL JUST HAVE TO BE MADE IN TERMS OF START TIMES AND MEETING TIMES.

Gene: NOW THAT WE KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT WHAT WILL BE DIFFERENT WHEN LAWMAKERS RETURN TO THE ROUNDHOUSE, LET'S GET SOME REACTION FROM OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS.

THIS WEEK I'M JOINED VIRTUALLY BY CATHY McGILL.

SHE IS FOUNDER AND CEO OF THE NEW MEXICO BLACK LEADERSHIP COUNCIL.

ATTORNEY AND LINE REGULAR SOPHIE MARTIN IS WITH US.

AND FORMER STATE HOUSE MINORITY WHIP DANIEL FOLEY JOINS US ONCE AGAIN.

SO FIRST OFF, GUYS, WE GOT SOME CLARIFICATION FROM MR. NORDSTRUM ON THOSE BOOSTERS I ASKED HIM ABOUT.

AS OF NOW, THEY ARE NOT A FACTOR IN DECLARING SOMEONE FULLY VACCINATED, AT LEAST IN THIS CONTEXT.

SO SOPHIE, WITH ALL THIS IN MIND, ARE THESE PRUDENT PRECAUTIONS?

AND HOW IMPORTANT IS THIS ONCE AGAIN TO ALLOW PEOPLE INTO THE CAPITOL TO WATCH OUR PUBLIC SERVANTS WORK.

Sophie: YOU KNOW, THERE WAS NEVER GOING TO BE A PERFECT SOLUTION HERE.

I MEAN, COVID JUST DOESN'T ALLOW FOR THAT, RIGHT.

BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT LEADERSHIP HAS COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE THAT WILL ALLOW PEOPLE TO COME IN THROUGH ZOOM, WILL ALLOW PEOPLE WHO ARE VACCINATED TO COME IN IN PERSON.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THERE WILL BE THE LOSS OF THE CULTURAL DISPLAYS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE REALITY WE'RE DEALING WITH RIGHT NOW.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I THOUGHT WAS REALLY NOTABLE, AND I WATCH FOR THIS, AND I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO DEAL WITH, LIKE, EVENTS AND THE PUBLIC AND THINGS LIKE THAT DO, THAT SORT OF CAREFUL, WELL, TODAY IT'S THIS KIND OF VACCINE, THAT SORT OF THINKING, BUT IT COULD BE BY THE TIME WE GET TO THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION THAT A THIRD DOSE WILL BE REQUIRED.

WE'RE CERTAINLY HEARING THAT ON BOTH THE NATIONAL AND LOCAL LEVELS.

SO I DO SEE ORGANIZATIONS SAYING, WE'RE JUST GOING TO FOLLOW WHAT'S IN PLACE THEN, AND FULLY VACCINATED IS THE TERM THAT FOLKS ARE USING.

Gene: GOOD POINTS THERE.

DAN, I WANT TO GET YOUR TAKE ON THIS.

YOU KNOW, HE JUST MENTIONED, AND OTHERS HAVE, THIS IS POTENTIALLY THE MOST TRANSPARENT SESSION WE HAVE HAD TO DATE IN NEW MEXICO GIVEN IT WILL BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC IN PERSON, AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, AND VIRTUALLY, AS WELL.

DO YOU AGREE, DAN?

AND IF SO, HOW VALUABLE IS THAT FOR CITIZENS?

I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF TOUGH TALK OUT THERE FROM SOME REPUBLICANS STILL SAYING THIS IS A GAME TO KEEP THE PUBLIC FROM GETTING THIS KIND OF INFORMATION.

Dan: GENE, I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING UP THE MANTRA OF IT'S THE MOST TRANSPARENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION EVER.

I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S ANYMORE TRANSPARENT THAN IT WAS WHEN EVERYBODY COULD COME AND GO AS THEY PLEASE, WHICH SEEMS SURPRISING.

I MEAN, THEY'VE BEEN DOING THE LIVE STREAMING FOR A FEW YEARS NOW AND YOU COULD COME AND GO.

LISTEN, THIS A TYPICAL.

YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK AT THIS STUFF, WHERE WE ARE WITH THE INCREASED NUMBERS OF COVID IN NEW MEXICO, THE FACT THAT WE'VE BEEN IN SOME SORT OF HYPER-POLL WHEN IT COMES TO ISOLATING OURSELVES, LOCKING THINGS DOWN, SOCIAL DISTANCING, GETTING THE SHOTS, AND WE'RE STILL HAVING THESE HUGE NUMBERS, YOU KNOW, IT DOES BEG THE QUESTION, AND I THINK IT'S A VALID QUESTION.

IF YOU WERE TO SAY, AS WE'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION ON THIS SHOW BEFORE ABOUT THE GUNS IN THE CAPITOL, AND WE'VE ALWAYS SAID, HEY, LISTEN, THE THOUGHT OF PEOPLE HAVING GUNS IN THE CAPITOL REALLY CALMS -- IT REALLY PREVENTS OTHER PEOPLE FROM STATING HOW THEY FEEL, AND THEIR THOUGHTS, AND SO THAT'S A LEGITIMATE CONVERSATION.

THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THIS IS CLEARLY, WHEN YOU START PUTTING IN POLICIES LIKE THIS SO WE ALL KNOW THAT NONE OF THE STUFF THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WHETHER IT'S SHOTS, WHETHER IT'S MASKS, PREVENTS YOU FROM SPREADING COVID, IT'S JUST TO KEEP YOU FROM DYING IF YOU GET IT.

IT DOES NOTHING TO KEEP ME FROM GIVING IT TO SOMEBODY ELSE.

SO IT'S AN INDIVIDUAL CHOICE THAT PEOPLE MAKE, I'VE CHOSEN TO MAKE.

Gene: NOTHING MIGHT BE A LITTLE STRONG THERE.

Dan: THERE'S NOT ANYBODY OUT THERE THAT SAYS, MASKS, GET A SHOT, AND YOU WILL NOT SPREAD THE DISEASE.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT SAYS THAT.

IF ANY OF YOU GUYS WANT TO SAY THAT -- Sophie: NO, BUT THERE'S RESEARCH THAT THERE IS A DECREASE IN SPREAD, THAT PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN FULLY VACCINATED, IT'S A LOT LESS LIKELY THAT THEY'LL SPREAD.

SO THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE WORKING ON.

Dan: THERE'S NO DOUBT THAT THERE'S BEEN SOME CONVERSATIONS ON BOTH SIDES WHEN IT COMES TO THAT, BUT THERE'S NOBODY OUT THERE SAYING THAT YOU SHOULD DO THIS.

SO EVERYTHING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS ABOUT ME TAKING PRECAUTIONS FOR MYSELF.

BUT NOW WE'RE GOING TO IMPOSE THESE PRECAUTIONS ON FOLKS BEFORE THEY CAN ATTEND THESE HEARINGS, JUST COINCIDENTALLY IT COINCIDES WITH REDISTRICTING, AND IT'S CLEARLY A SHOT, I THINK THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP IS RIGHT, IT'S CLEARLY A SHOT AT LIMITING THE PEOPLE WHO WE KNOW ARE -- Gene: WHAT'S BEING LIMITED, DAN?

I'M CURIOUS, IN YOUR MIND?

Dan: IF YOU'RE NOT VACCINATED, YOU CAN'T COME.

Gene: YOU CAN STILL WATCH.

Dan: OH, OF COURSE.

Cathy: HEY, I'M SORRY, I JUST HAVE TO SAY -- Dan: JUST SIT OVER THERE, GENE, AND WATCH IN THE BACK CORNER, BECAUSE WE KNOW HOW EVERY TIME THEY DO THE ZOOM MEETINGS, THEY WORK SO WELL, THEY DON'T KICK PEOPLE OFF.

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO LOG ON.

THERE'S NOTHING LIKE SHOWING UP IN PERSON.

AND SO, AGAIN, I -- Cathy: DAN, CAN I JUST SAY -- Gene: LET ME GET CATHY IN HERE.

GO AHEAD, CATHY.

Dan: I'M JUST GOING TO FINISH MY THOUGHT FOR A MINUTE.

Cathy: HOLD ON ONE SECOND, DAN.

Dan: I DON'T GO TO THE MEETINGS -- Cathy: I THINK WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS NOT -- Gene: DANIEL, HANG ON A SECOND.

Dan: -- BUT THE STUFF THEY'RE DOING HERE IS 100% TO EFFECT A CERTAIN SEGMENT OF THE VOTES POPULATION, AND I JUST THINK THAT THAT'S THEIR GOAL.

Cathy: I THINK THAT THERE'S A CORE THESIS, THAT THIS IS ABOUT POLITICS.

BUT I THINK THAT IT'S ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

AND THAT'S CLEAR.

NONE OF US ON THIS CALL ARE DOCTORS, AND WE CAN'T MAKE THOSE EQUIVOCAL STATEMENTS THAT HAVE JUST BEEN MADE.

LIKE WE HAD, YOU KNOW, SOMEONE SAYING IT'S NOT A COVID DRIVEN POLICY.

IF IT WAS, THE CLEAR EVIDENCE OF VACCINATED INDIVIDUALS ABILITY TO SPREAD THE VIRUS WOULD NEGATE THE REASONING FOR THE RULE.

THAT IS LIKE -- YOU KNOW, THERE'S SO MANY THINGS WRONG WITH THAT STATEMENT.

IT'S NOT ABOUT POLITICS.

IT'S ABOUT PUBLIC SAFETY AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

AND I THINK THAT AS LONG AS WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO PROMOTE THAT NARRATIVE, IT'S JUST ABOUT CORE THESIS THAT YOU HAVE, THE DEMOCRATS ARE OUT TO, YOU KNOW, KEEP PEOPLE FROM COMING, WHEN WHAT WE KNOW IS -- AND I CAN PROVE IT BY ME.

LIKE, IT'S HARD FOR ME TO GET UP TO THE SESSION.

BUT THIS PAST YEAR IN THE PAST SESSION, EVEN THOUGH IT'S BEEN AVAILABLE FOR A LONG TIME, IT WASN'T REALLY PUBLICIZED, I WAS ABLE TO MONITOR A LOT OF THINGS THAT I COULDN'T HAVE MONITORED BEFORE.

IT HAS INCREASED ACCESS TO THE INFORMATION, TO THE CITIZENRY, AND THAT IS THE TRUTH.

WE CAN PROVE IT BY THE NUMBERS.

AND SO SAYING THESE OTHER THINGS IS JUST FLAT-OUT NOT TRUE.

Dan: IT'S A 100% FALSEHOOD.

YOU JUST SAID, IT'S THERE, BUT YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, MEANS IT'S THERE.

IT'S BEEN THERE.

Cathy: IT WASN'T PUBLICIZED.

Dan: BUT TELLING PEOPLE -- Gene: I'VE GOT A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS HERE.

Dan: -- THAT MORE FOLKS ARE GOING TO BE WATCHING IT ONLINE, I MEAN, THIS IS A PURELY PARTISAN CONVERSATION.

Gene: DANIEL, COME ON, NOW.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF STUFF TO COVER HERE.

SOPHIE, LET'S GO TO FIREARMS IN THE ROUNDHOUSE.

THE FIRST SESSION WHERE GUNS ARE BANNED FROM INSIDE THE ROUNDHOUSE.

THIS WILL MEAN CHECKS FOR EVERYONE ENTERING THE BUILDING, OF COURSE.

YOUR SENSE OF THAT AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK ON THE GROUND, AS THEY SAY.

Sophie: YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY, DAN TOUCHED ON THIS A MOMENT AGO, AND I THOUGHT HE BROUGHT UP WHAT WAS AN IMPORTANT ELEMENT, WHICH IS THAT FIREARMS CAN HAVE A CHILLING EFFECT ON FREE SPEECH AND PUBLIC SPEECH, AND THEY ARE ALSO, YOU KNOW, OR CAN BE A THREAT TO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE THERE IN THE ROUNDHOUSE.

SO THIS SEEMS ENTIRELY LOGICAL TO ME.

NEW MEXICO IS NOT THE FIRST TO HAVE DONE SOMETHING LIKE THIS, TO HAVE PUT THIS IN PLACE, AND I JUST WOULD REALLY QUESTION THE PERSON WHO THINKS, OH, I ABSOLUTELY MUST BE ABLE TO BE ARMED IN THE ROUNDHOUSE WHEN THERE IS SECURITY ON THE OUTSIDE, YOU KNOW, TO PREVENT ALL FIREARMS FROM COMING IN.

I WOULD QUESTION THE MOTIVATIONS OF THAT PERSON.

SO I THINK THAT THIS IS A -- I THINK THIS IS A RATIONAL STEP, AND I THINK IT DOES SERVE TO, YOU KNOW, TO ALLEVIATE THAT POTENTIAL CHILLING EFFECT.

Gene: CATHY, YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS, TOO.

I'VE SAID ON THIS SHOW A LOT, PEOPLE HAVE A RIGHT TO THEIR FEAR.

THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO IT.

Cathy: YES.

Gene: AND PEOPLE WHO WANT TO INTIMIDATE PEOPLE FOR NO GOOD REASON OUTSIDE OF POLITICS, YOU'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING.

YOUR SENSE OF IT.

Cathy: I THINK IT'S A RATIONAL STEP.

AND, YOU KNOW, AS FOR ME, PERSONALLY, I SUPPORT IT FULLY, AND I DON'T THINK THAT THERE'S A REASON WHY PEOPLE NEED TO HAVE THEIR GUNS WITH THEM IN A HEARING.

Gene: DANIEL, YOUR THOUGHTS ON GUNS IN THE ROUNDHOUSE.

WHAT DOES IT DO TO BAN THEM, IN YOUR VIEW?

Dan: IT'S JUST ANOTHER GRAB.

I MEAN, THERE'S -- YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH GUNS.

THE TEN YEARS I WAS THERE, THERE WAS NO HOSTAGE TAKING, SHOOTING, LOCKDOWNS.

THERE'S POLICE EVERYWHERE.

IT'S JUST, WE KEEP -- YOU KNOW, WHAT WE'VE DONE, AND WE CONTINUE TO DO IT, WE'VE DONE IT SINCE WE BECAME A COUNTRY, WE CONSTANTLY GIVE UP RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES ALL UNDER THE AUSPICES OF SAFETY, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY WE NEVER GET THOSE RIGHTS AND CIVIL LIBERTIES BACK.

WE'RE ALWAYS LIKE, OH, WE'RE NEVER THAT MUCH SAFER, AND IT ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE, YOU KNOW, A GOOD WAY TO APPEASE INDIVIDUALS.

Gene: HEY, SOPH, AS WE WAIT TO SEE WHAT'S GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA FOR LAWMAKERS, WE KNOW REDISTRICTING, DAN BROUGHT UP EARLIER, IS FRONT AND CENTER.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE DIFFERENT MAPS HERE ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS.

BUT WILL LAWMAKERS SERIOUSLY CONSIDER THE GUIDANCE FROM THE INDEPENDENT COMMITTEE, OR SHOULD WE EXPECT POLITICS TO TAKE OVER, AS I ASKED MR. NORDSTRUM?

Sophie: WELL, THE LATTER, RIGHT, THE LATTER.

BUT I DO HOPE, AND I HOLD OUT SOME OPTIMISM, SOME AMOUNT OF OPTIMISM, THAT THE LEGISLATURE WILL LOOK REALLY CAREFULLY AT THE WORK THAT THIS GROUP HAS DONE.

CERTAINLY IT'S BEEN IMPRESSIVE TO SEE THEIR OUTREACH THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

NO PROCESS LIKE THIS IS EVER PERFECT.

BUT AS I THINK I'VE SAID HERE BEFORE, I HAVE A LOT OF CONFIDENCE IN THE FOLKS WHO HAVE BEEN LEADING THIS PROGRAM.

FORMER SUPREME COURT JUSTICE CHAVEZ, ETC.

I THINK IT WILL BE -- I THINK IT'LL BE A VIGOROUS DEBATE, AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY A LOT OF ENTRENCHED INTERESTS.

NOBODY WANTS TO LOSE THEIR SEAT.

AND SO NOW IT COMES BACK TO THE PEOPLE WHO THIS WILL AFFECT THEIR POWER, THEIR LIVELIHOODS, ETC.

IT'LL BE INTERESTING TO SEE HOW IT PLAYS OUT.

Gene: NO QUESTION THERE.

CATHY, SAME QUESTION THERE.

IT'S INTERESTING WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT HOW WE APPROACH THESE THINGS, WHY IS IT SO DIFFERENT THIS TIME AROUND?

HAVE WE NOT DONE A GOOD JOB TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC IS GOING TO BE COVERED HERE?

Cathy: I THINK THAT WHAT WE SEE FROM MY VANTAGE, THE NEW MEXICO BLACK VOTERS COLLABORATIVE AND NEW MEXICO BLACK CENTRAL ORGANIZING COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRST TIME, REALLY, IN THE STATE'S HISTORY HAD SOME TESTIMONY IN THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS, AND IF WE KEEP PEELING BACK THE LAYERS, WHAT THIS IS REALLY ABOUT IS HAVING ACCURATE COUNTS IN THE CENSUS AND HOW WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THAT, AND IT EQUATES TO THE LACK OF REPRESENTATION.

SO WE HAVE TO KEEP GOING BACK.

THIS IS WHY I KEEP WANTING PEOPLE TO GET EDUCATED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN 2020 WITH THE CENSUS.

IT'S GOING TO EFFECT US FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS.

AND WE ACTUALLY, THIS TIME, HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN ON THE PROCESS AND TALK ABOUT COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN, AND WHERE WE ARE LOCATED AND TRYING TO GET, YOU KNOW, AN ACCURATE REPRESENTATION AND AN ACCURATE COUNT.

SO I THINK THAT THE REASON WHY IT'S DIFFERENT IS BECAUSE IT NEEDS TO BE DIFFERENT, AND PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO EXPAND THE PUBLIC'S ABILITY TO HAVE SOME INPUT IN THIS PROCESS.

Gene: DAN, REAL QUICK, WE'RE UNDER A MINUTE -- ACTUALLY, UNDER 30 SECONDS.

I GOT TO GET YOUR TAKE ON THIS, FOR SURE.

IS IT JUST GOING TO BE POLITICIZED, AND WHATEVER HAPPENED IN THE -- Dan: IT'S THE MOST POLITICAL THING YOU DO IN POLITICS.

SOPHIE'S RIGHT.

ARE THEY GOING TO LOOK AT IT?

OH, THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT, BUT THEY'RE ALL WORKING ON THE DEAL THAT'S GOING TO BE BEST TO SERVE THEM.

TO SAY YOU'RE GOING TO TAKE PARTISAN POLITICS OUT OF REDISTRICTING, REGARDLESS OF WHAT PARTY YOU'RE IN -- IT IS THE MOST PARTISAN POLITICAL THING, AND I JUST THINK PEOPLE IN NEW MEXICO AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY NEED TO REALIZE, ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES.

AND NOW IS NOT THE TIME TO SAY, OH, THE DEMOCRATS ARE GOING TO GET MORE SEATS.

THEY ARE.

THEY WON.

THEY'VE GOT THE VOTES.

IF YOU DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN, YOU SHOULD HAVE VOTED OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS.

SO IT'S THE MOST PARTISAN POLITICAL DEAL, REGARDLESS OF PARTY.

I'M NOT BLAMING NEW MEXICO DEMOCRATS.

IT'S AS PARTISAN AND POLITICAL IN TEXAS AS IT IS HERE.

IT'S JUST INTERESTING WHEN YOU HEAR PEOPLE ON THE OUTSIDE -- NOT SOPHIE.

SHE KNOWS.

AND CATHY, YOU GUYS KNOW.

BUT WHEN YOU HEAR STUFF ABOUT, OH, WE WANT THIS TO BE A NONPARTISAN DEAL, THESE GUYS ARE IN THE BACK SAVING EACH OTHER'S HIDE, FIGURING OUT WHO THEY WANT TO SERVE UP, WHAT DISTRICTS THEY WANT TO DRAW, WHAT BEST REPRESENTS THE PARTY ELITISTS AND THE PARTY FAITHFUL OF BOTH SIDES, AND THAT'S THE PLAN THEY'RE GOING TO COME UP WITH.

Gene: GOTCHA.

WE'LL OF COURSE BE TRACKING ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS FROM THE ROUNDHOUSE WHEN THE SPECIAL SESSION STARTS.

YOU CAN WATCH MY FULL DISCUSSION WITH THE SENATE MAJORITY'S CHRIS NORDSTRUM ON FACEBOOK AND YOUTUBE FOR A BIT MORE INSIGHT ON THAT REDISTRICTING PROCESS.

Tarry: YOU KNOW, THEY'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 20 YEARS.

THEY ARE WELL IN FRONT OF THE CURVE IN EUROPE, AND THEY'VE INVESTED AND THEY CONTINUE TO INVEST IN NEW TECHNOLOGY.

SO THAT WILL BE ONE OF THE HUGE BENEFITS WE GET, IS WE CAN LEVERAGE SOME OF THAT TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY'RE WELL DOWN THE PATH ON.

Gene: WORDS MATTER, AS WE WERE ALL REMINDED THIS WEEK BY NEW MEXICO’S OWN, AND U.S.

INTERIOR SECRETARY, DEB HAALAND.

SHE ANNOUNCED PLANS TO REMOVE THE DEROGATORY WORD “SQUAW” FROM ALL PUBLIC LANDS, WHICH COULD AFFECT MORE THAN 650 LOCATIONS, GUYS.

THAT INCLUDES LAKES, CREEKS, VALLEYS, AND A LOT MORE.

MS. HAALAND ALSO SAYS SHE'S COMMITTED TO IDENTIFYING OTHER CULTURALLY INSENSITIVE NAMES, MUCH AS THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT DID BACK IN THE 60s AND 70s WITH WORDS THAT WERE DEROGATORY TO AFRICAN AND JAPANESE AMERICAN COMMUNITIES BACK THEN.

CATHY, MS. HAALAND IS CERTAINLY BRINGING HER NATIVE AMERICAN VOICE TO THE NATIONAL STAGE, ISN'T SHE?

Cathy: ABSOLUTELY, AS WELL SHE SHOULD BE.

YOU KNOW, THIS WAS ROLLED OUT DURING NATIVE AMERICAN HISTORY MONTH, AND I THINK QUITE APPROPRIATELY SO.

ALTHOUGH THERE ARE LOTS OF SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE WORD IS DEROGATORY, WHAT I WANT TO SAY IS THAT I DON'T GET TO DECIDE THAT.

THE PEOPLE WHO ARE, YOU KNOW, NATIVE AMERICAN GET TO DECIDE IT.

DEB HAALAND IS THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR, AND FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME THERE IS SOMEONE WHO IS NATIVE AMERICAN WHO IS IN CHARGE OF IT, SO IT MAKES PERFECT SENSE THAT SHE WOULD SAY, YOU KNOW, ON MY WATCH, THIS IS GOING TO GET CHANGED.

SO I SAY, YOU KNOW, GO DO IT.

Gene: SOPHIE, WE LEARNED THAT THE CITY OF LAS CRUCES IS CONSIDERING CHANGING THE NAME OF SQUAW MOUNTAIN DRIVE.

IS THERE ANY REASON NOT TO MAKE THESE NAME CHANGES WHEREVER WE CAN?

Sophie: WELL, I SUPPOSE SOMEONE MAY ARGUE THAT THEY HAVE LETTERHEAD WITH THE NAME OF THE STREET ON IT.

I HAVE BOXES HERE, WHAT AM I GOING TO DO?

Gene: I REMEMBER THAT WHEN WE FLIPPED TO MLK AVENUE YEARS AGO.

Sophie: THAT'S NOT A GOOD REASON.

Gene: IT WAS ABOUT LETTERHEAD.

Sophie: AND GENE, I MYSELF LOOK FORWARD TO THE DAY THAT THE PANELISTS ON THIS SHOW DON'T WANT TO SAY THE WORD.

DON'T WANT TO SAY THE WORD, JUST AS WE WOULD NOT SAY OTHER WORDS.

I THINK THIS HAS BEEN A REAL EYEOPENER FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE, THIS MOVEMENT.

AND I'LL ALSO POINT OUT THAT THIS IS NOT -- THIS DIDN'T COME OUT OF NOWHERE.

WHEN SHE WAS A REPRESENTATIVE, DEB HAALAND PUT FORWARD LEGISLATION TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING SIMILAR WITH A BROADER NUMBER OF LOCATIONS THROUGH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, AND THAT LEGISLATION HAS BEEN REINTRODUCED.

SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT THERE'S A REALLY LOVELY CONCERTED PUSH ON THIS ISSUE, AND SHE'S THE RIGHT PERSON IN THE RIGHT PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME.

Gene: YOU KNOW, DAN, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, THERE'S ALSO A BIT OF MOMENTUM ON THIS.

THERE HAVE BEEN STATES FROM MAINE TO OREGON WHO HAVE REMOVED THE WORD "SQUAW" OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS.

AND I REMIND FOLKS, LAKE TAHOE, THEY DROPPED SQUAW VALLEY.

I MEAN, EVERYBODY KNEW WHERE SQUAW VALLEY WAS.

YOU DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT THE WORD, IT'S SO FAMILIAR.

SO AGAIN, THE PUBLIC SEEMS TO WANT THIS, AS WELL.

IS THERE ANYTHING WRONG HERE WITH REMOVING THESE NAMES, AS FAR AS -- Dan: THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH REMOVING THEM, BUT I THINK YOU'RE KIND OF HAVING TWO DIFFERENT CONVERSATIONS.

WHEN YOU SAY THE PUBLIC WANTS TO HAVE THESE THINGS REMOVED, I THINK THE WORD SQUAW -- AND IT'S INTERESTING, I HAVE A FRIEND OF MINE, NATIVE AMERICAN, WAS A TRIBAL LEADER, THIS CAME UP JUST THE OTHER DAY AND HE WAS LIKE, I'M CONFUSED, BECAUSE IN OUR LANGUAGE, SQUAW MEANS WIFE OR WOMAN.

HE SAYS, YOU CAN USE IT IN A NEGATIVE CONTEXT, THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT, BUT HIS COMMENTS TO ME, WHICH IS EXACTLY THE WAY I FELT, WAS, I MEAN, THERE'S A LOT OF PROBLEMS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW, AND GOING AFTER THINGS LIKE THAT TODAY, THERE JUST SEEMS TO BE A LOT MORE LOWER HANGING FRUIT.

Gene: BUT CAN'T YOU SAY THAT ABOUT ANYTHING, DAN?

I MEAN, THE THERE'S-BETTER-THINGS-TO-DO SYNDROME?

SHE IS THE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR SECRETARY.

THIS IS RIGHT UNDER HER PURVIEW.

IT'S NOT LIKE SHE'S REACHING ACROSS THE HALL.

Dan: SO WITH ALL THE STUFF GOING ON WITH OUR ENERGY CRISIS AND DRILLING AND GETTING ACCESS TO PUBLIC LANDS, ALL STUFF THAT FALLS UNDER HER PURVIEW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE GOING TO CELEBRATE?

WE'RE PAYING THE HIGHEST GAS PRICES WE'VE BEEN PAYING IN THE LAST -- Sophie: TO WHAT EXTENT, THOUGH, DO THE COMMUNITY LEADERS WHO WILL SERVE AND THE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE RUNNING NONPROFITS, WHO ARE INVOLVED IN ADVOCACY, TO WHAT EXTENT IS THAT COMMUNITY, THAT GROUP OF PEOPLE, GOING TO SOLVE AN ENERGY CRISIS?

THIS IS A DIFFERENT GROUP OF PEOPLE FOCUSED ON A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

IT'S NOT, WE'RE GOING TO TAKE OUR OIL AND GAS EXPERTS AND PUT THEM ON THIS ISSUE.

THEY KEEP DOING THEIR OIL AND GAS STUFF.

Dan: NOBODY IS CLAIMING THAT.

GENE ASKED -- Cathy: IT'S ALSO NOT AN EITHER/OR, IT'S A BOTH/AND.

SO IT'S TIME TO DO IT.

IT'S TIME TO DO IT.

Dan: GENE SAID SHE'S THE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT, AND THAT'S WHAT MY RESPONSE TO GENE WAS.

HE WAS LIKE, OH, YOU'RE SAYING -- I THINK THERE'S LOTS OF WORDS OUT THERE THAT HAVE BEEN USED THAT HAVE A TOTALLY NEGATIVE CONNOTATION AND CHANGES NEED TO HAPPEN.

LOOK, IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME WHETHER THEY CHANGE THE WORD OR NOT.

CHANGE ALL THE WORDS THEY WANT TO CHANGE.

I JUST THINK THIS IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF VIRTUE SIGNALING.

IT'S, WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS SOMETHING, WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET OUR KUDOS OUT THERE, AND AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S GOING TO MAKE LITTLE TO NO DIFFERENCE, AND IT'S INSTEAD OF TAKING ON THE REAL ISSUES.

LOOK, I'D LIKE TO ASK -- YOU KNOW, I WOULD ASK THE SECRETARY, WE'RE CELEBRATING NATIVE AMERICAN MONTH BY CHANGING THE WORD, TAKING THE WORD SQUAW FOR A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION, BUT ALL THE TIME SHE WAS IN CONGRESS AND NOW AS THE SECRETARY, WE'VE GOT A PROBLEM WITH MISSING INDIGENOUS WOMEN.

WHERE ARE WE ON THAT?

Sophie: WHICH SHE IS ALSO A MAJOR ADVOCATE ON.

Gene: THAT'S THE FIRST THING SHE WENT AFTER, DAN.

Sophie: SHE'S THE FIRST PERSON IN THAT POSITION WHO HAS MADE MOVEMENT ON IT.

Dan: YOU'VE GOT TO WAKE UP AND PAY ATTENTION.

SAYING YOU'RE FOR SOMETHING DOESN'T MEAN YOU'RE ACTUALLY MAKING A DIFFERENCE.

Gene: GUYS, WE NEED TO MOVE ON, HANG ON A QUICK SEC.

SOPHIE, SHOULD THIS APPROACH BE AN EXAMPLE TO OTHER DIFFICULT CONVERSATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS, LIKE THE STATUE AND MONOLITH CONTROVERSIES WE'VE SEEN HERE IN ALBUQUERQUE AND SANTA FE?

DOES THIS CONVERSATION FORM THOSE CONVERSATIONS, OR VICE VERSA?

HOW SHOULD WE APPROACH THIS?

Sophie: I THINK IT CAN.

I MEAN, I THINK IT CAN, ESPECIALLY AS WE LOOK AT OTHER -- YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY IN TERMS OF LANGUAGE.

BUT IT CERTAINLY COULD IN TERMS OF OTHER MATTERS.

WHAT I THINK IS REALLY INTERESTING ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION, TO USE THE EXAMPLE FROM LAKE TAHOE FOR THE SKI BASIN -- WHICH BY THE WAY, I DID NOT ACTUALLY KNOW THAT'S WHERE IT WAS.

YOU KNOW, COMMUNITY ACTIVISTS FOR YEARS IN THE LAKE TAHOE REGION HAVE TRIED TO GET THAT NAME CHANGED, AND THEY RECEIVED NOTHING, STONEWALL FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

AND NOW THEY HAVE A REAL OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE AN IMPACT, AND A PARTNERSHIP IS BEING FORMED -- PARTNERSHIPS, I SHOULD SAY, ARE BEING FORMED SO THAT THESE DECISIONS CAN MOVE FORWARD MORE QUICKLY, MORE EFFICIENTLY, AND WITH REAL FEEDBACK AND INPUT.

Gene: CATHY, AGAIN, IT'S INTERESTING.

I HEAR DAN'S POINT AND OTHERS, MAYBE THE ORIGIN OF THE ALGONQUIAN WORD "SQUAW" MEANT WOMAN OR WIFE, BUT NO ONE WANTS TO SEEM TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT YOU CAN TAKE A WORD AND CHANGE IT INTO SOMETHING ELSE QUITE EASILY AND USE IT AS A HAMMER, YOU KNOW.

Cathy: I'M GOING TO USE THE WORD "SPADE," RIGHT.

IT BECAME ASSOCIATED WITH BLACK PEOPLE.

SO WHEN YOU SAY, "I'M GOING TO CALL A SPADE A SPADE," AND I'M SITTING IN THE ROOM, I'M GOING TO SAY, "YOU KNOW WHAT, YOU NEED TO GET SOME EDUCATION."

SO THE ACTUAL WORD DIDN'T START OUT MEANING THAT, BUT THE NOW CONNOTATION OF IT, WHEN YOU SAY IT, MEANS SOMETHING ELSE.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE.

IT'S NOT AN EITHER/OR, IT'S A BOTH/AND.

THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH DOING IT.

AND IF NOT NOW, WHEN?

AND IF NOT DEB HAALAND, WHO?

Gene: WELL, THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

AGAIN, IS SHE DOING HER JOB?

THAT'S ALWAYS THE QUESTION.

DAN, LET ME BOUNCE BACK TO YOU.

I HEAR YOUR POINTS ABOUT THERE'S OTHER THINGS TO DO AT INTERIOR, BUT LET'S STICK TO THE KNITTING HERE.

IS IT NOT MOVING THE PUBLIC CONSCIOUSNESS FORWARD BY REMOVING THESE NAMES?

JUST AS SIMPLE AS THAT.

Dan: YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO GET ME TO ANSWER.

THE WORD HAS NO -- I'M NOT THE GUY TO ASK.

IT HAS NO NEGATIVE CONNOTATION TO ME.

IF IT AFFECTS PEOPLE AND THEY WANT IT REMOVED, I GOT NO PROBLEM WITH IT.

I'M NOT PROTESTING THAT SHE SHOULDN'T BE CHANGING THE NAME.

IT DOESN'T -- LOOK, IT DOESN'T AFFECT ME, SO I CAN'T GIVE YOU AN OPINION THAT SAYS, YOU SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T CHANGE THAT WORD.

YOU SPECIFICALLY ASKED ME, AS MY COMMENT WAS, I JUST THINK THERE'S BIGGER THINGS THAT I THINK MANY PEOPLE THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE FOCUSING ON, AND THAT BLEW UP INTO THE WHOLE, WELL, I'M MISSING THE POINT HERE.

I DON'T THINK I'M MISSING THE POINT.

I THINK, TO SOPHIE'S COMMENTS EARLIER, IT'S -- Gene: DANIEL, SHE HAS A STAFF OF LIKE OVER A COUPLE OF HUNDRED.

THEY CAN HANDLE MORE THAN ONE ISSUE AT A TIME AT THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, TRUST ME.

Dan: WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE, GENE.

YOU CAN CHANGE THE TOPIC.

YOU'RE THE ONE, THIS GROUP, THIS TV SHOW, BROUGHT THIS TOPIC UP.

YOU ASKED ME WHAT I THOUGHT ABOUT IT.

DO I THINK SHE'S GOT THE ENTIRE DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR WORKING ON THIS?

NO, GENE, I DON'T.

I DON'T THINK THAT.

LISTEN, IF YOU WANT TO RUN HER CAMPAIGN AND DEFEND HER, YOU DO IT.

I JUST THINK SHE'S NOT DOING THE RIGHT JOB THAT SHE NEEDS TO BE DOING.

DO I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE WORD SQUAW?

IT DOESN'T AFFECT ME.

I GET IT.

Cathy: EXACTLY.

IT DOESN'T AFFECT YOU.

IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU.

Dan: I DIDN'T SAY IT WAS ABOUT ME.

BUT RIGHT NOW, I'M THE ONE ON THE SHOW TALKING, SO IT IS ABOUT ME.

IT'S MY OPINION THAT THEY'RE ASKING ABOUT.

I KNOW YOU DON'T LIKE MY OPINION, BUT IT IS MY OPINION.

Gene: ALL RIGHT, DAN, I GOT TO WRAP HERE.

Dan: IT'S MY OPINION I'M GIVING ON THE SHOW.

Gene: YOU CAN LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS ISSUE AND THE IMPORTANCE OF PLACE NAMES ON OUR WEBSITE IN AN "OUR LAND" EPISODE LAURA PASKUS DID WITH THEN-REPRESENTATIVE HAALAND EARLY THIS YEAR.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON NOW.

A MERGER BETWEEN NEW MEXICO’S OWN PNM RESOURCES AND SPANISH-OWNED AVANGRID IS IN THE WORKS.

IT’S A MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR DEAL THAT WILL AFFECT NEARLY EVERY HOUSEHOLD IN THE STATE.

IN PART ONE OF AN INTERVIEW WITH TOP EXECUTIVES AT BOTH COMPANIES, ENVIRONMENT REPORTER LAURA PASKUS ASKS, WHAT’S IN IT FOR NEW MEXICANS?

Laura: THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THE PROPOSED MERGER BETWEEN YOUR TWO COMPANIES.

THIS IS A SUPER COMPLICATED ISSUE AND I AM REALLY LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING KIND OF A PLAIN LANGUAGE TALK ABOUT THESE REALLY COMPLICATED ISSUES.

PAT AND DON, I WOULD LOVE TO START WITH YOU.

WHY DOES PNM NEED THIS MERGER?

WHY IS THIS SO IMPORTANT FOR PNM?

Collawn: WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY AND WE WILL ENDEAVOR TO GET RID OF OUR NORMAL ACRONYMS WHICH WE ALL USE.

PNM STARTED LOOKING AROUND AND SURVEYING THE ENERGY LANDSCAPE.

AS YOU KNOW FROM YOUR WORK, IT IS INCREDIBLY COMPLICATED.

THE ISSUE OF CLIMATE CHANGE IS PARAMOUNT AND THE FASTER WE CAN TRANSITION OUR PORTFOLIO THE BETTER.

TECHNOLOGY IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE INTERESTING AND MORE AND MORE SOPHISTICATED.

YOU REALLY NEED TO BE A LARGE COMPANY WITH A LOT OF MONEY ON YOUR BALANCE SHEET IN ORDER TO HELP KEEP COSTS LOW FOR CUSTOMERS, AND WHILE PNM IS A LARGE COMPANY IN TERMS OF NEW MEXICO, WE ARE A VERY SMALL UTILITY IN THE UNITED STATES.

SO WE STARTED LOOKING AROUND FOR SOMEONE THAT HAD ALL THE THINGS WE WANTED IN A MERGER PARTNER.

SOMEONE WHO HAS THE SAME VALUES WHEN IT COMES TO THE ENVIRONMENT, FOR OUR COMMUNITIES, OUR EMPLOYEES AND OUR CULTURE HERE IN NEW MEXICO AND COMMUNITIES.

SOMEONE THAT HAD A BIG BALANCE SHEET AND SOMEONE THAT HAD TECHNOLOGICAL EXPERTISE.

AND WE LOOKED AROUND AND SURVEYED ALL THE UTILITIES IN THE UNITED STATES AND ENDED UP WORKING WITH AVANGRID BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THEY WERE THE PERFECT FIT FOR ALL THOSE THINGS I LISTED.

AND AVANGRID HAPPENS TO BE MAJORITY OWNED, 80% OWNED BY A COMPANY IN SPAIN CALLED IBERDROLA, WHICH IS A WORLD LEADER IN RENEWABLES AND TECHNOLOGY AND HAS A VERY STRONG BALANCE SHEET AND A CREDIT RATING.

SO, IT WAS SORT OF A MARRIAGE MADE IN HEAVEN.

TOOK A LITTLE ROMANCE BUT WE THOUGHT IT MADE SENSE BECAUSE THEY WANT WHAT IS BEST FOR NEW MEXICANS JUST AS WE WANT WHAT IS BEST FOR NEW MEXICANS.

Laura: PEDRO, THANKS FOR JOINING US.

WHAT IS KIND OF YOUR ELEVATOR PITCH FOR THE CURRENT PNM CUSTOMER?

HOW WILL THIS MERGER BENEFIT PNM CUSTOMERS?

Blazquez: IF YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE THE BEST QUALITY OF SERVICE, IT IS NOT ONLY US.

I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE CAN DO THAT.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS THE BEST QUALITY OF SERVICE AT THE CHEAPEST PRICE, UNLESS YOU HAVE CRITICAL MASS, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

WE HAVE 32 MILLION CUSTOMERS.

IMAGINE OUR PURCHASING POWER TO BUY THINGS.

PNM HAS A MILLION, LESS THAN A MILLION.

SO FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW, IT IS IMPOSSIBLE YOU CAN BUY THINGS THAT WILL ALLOW YOU TO GET THAT SERVICE AT THE SAME PRICES.

SAP, TOP OF STATIONS, WIRES, EVERYTHING.

SO WE ALL NEED TO COME TOGETHER AND THAT IS WHY THE ANGLE FOR CUSTOMER IN NEW MEXICO FOR ME IS SIMPLE.

WE ARE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT PNM AND CUSTOMERS BENEFIT FROM OUR SIZE.

SECOND, THE BALANCE SHEET.

I THINK THEY MENTIONED THAT.

AS EXAMPLE, PNM HAS IN HOLDING COMPANY, ONE BILLION OF DEBT.

WE ARE HAPPY TO TAKE THAT BILLION TO OUR HOLDING COMPANY IN THE U.S.

OKAY?

WE ALREADY HAVE IN THE U.S. OPERATIONS MORE OR LESS FOUR TIMES THE SIZE OF PNM.

WE ALREADY HAVE BIG COMPANY IN THE U.S. WE OWN EIGHT UTILITIES.

I SAID THE SAME THING EVERY TIME WHEN I BOUGHT THE UTILITY.

WHEN WE MERGE WITH YOU, WE WANT TO BE LOCAL, BUT OUR BALANCE SHEET, EVERY SINGLE TIME WE ACQUIRE A UTILITY, THEIR RATING WENT UP BY ONE NOTCH.

IF YOU'RE RATING GOES UP, BASICALLY THE COST GOES DOWN AND THE RATE PAYERS BENEFIT.

THESE ONE BILLION THAT YOU HAVE IN THE HOLDING COMPANY RIGHT NOW, WE MOVE TO AVANGRID HOLDING COMPANY.

IMAGINE WHAT IT IS FOR NEW MEXICO TO HAVE ONE BILLION LESS OF DEBT.

OTHERWISE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN CARE OF BY NEW MEXICANS OVER MANY YEARS, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE.

AND THIRD, I THINK THE CUSTOMERS WE BELIEVE THE GREEN WORLD HAS NOW COME BACK.

WE STARTED FIGHTING IN THAT WORLD 20 YEARS AGO WHEN NOBODY WAS FIGHTING, SO, I THINK, WE WERE VERY ALONE 20 YEARS AGO FIGHTING AGAINST A LOT OF PEOPLE.

AND A LOT OF COMPANIES, A LOT GOVERNMENTS.

EVERYBODY IS VERY GREEN, EVERYBODY IS GREEN RIGHT NOW.

BUT I CAN TELL YOU, LAST WEEK AND TWO WEEKS AGO WE WERE THE GUYS THERE FIGHTING, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE SURE THERE WAS AGREEMENT.

I THINK YOU KNOW BIDEN, PRESIDENT BIDEN, THERE WAS A BILL TWO DAYS AGO.

AVANGRID WAS THERE.

WE WERE PROBABLY THE ONLY ENERGY COMPANY.

WHY?

BECAUSE WE KNOW THE GUYS FIGHT TO GO MAKE SURE THE WORLD IS MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

WE HAD PROOF OF IT.

WE WANT TO DO IT, WE PROVE IT.

WE HAVE IT DONE.

THOSE ARE MAIN REASONS WHY WE BELIEVE WE ARE THE RIGHT PARTNER FOR PNM AND WE ALSO RUN THE COMPANIES LOCALLY.

I KNOW A LOT OF U.S. COMPANIES, WHEN THEY GO BROKE, THEY SEND HUNDREDS OF AMERICANS TO RUN IT, THE CHINESE, THEY SEND 1000, GERMANS.

IN OUR CASE IT IS VERY SIMPLE.

CHECK OUR MANAGEMENT IN THE U.S.

RIGHT NOW.

IT IS ALL AMERICAN.

THERE MAY BE ONE GUY WHO IS NOT AMERICAN OR ONE LADY, YOU KNOW.

BUT THE REST ARE AMERICANS AND IF THEY ARE NOT AMERICANS, THEY ARE THE BEST WE CAN FIND.

HOW WE ARE GOING TO BE RUNNING PNM.

YOU HAVE DON THERE RIGHT NOW.

WE EXPECTING DON TO BE THE PERSON MAKING THE DECISIONS.

YOU CAN CALL OUR CEO'S OF THE OTHER UTILITIES, YOU KNOW, AND ASK THEM HOW THEY RUN THE UTILITIES.

THEY ARE THE PEOPLE IN CHARGE.

Laura: IF THE MERGER WERE TO GO THROUGH, WHAT ARE SOME OF THE SHORTER TERM AND THEN LONGER TERM PLANS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY IN NEW MEXICO, SOME OF THE CHANGES WE MIGHT SEE?

Tarry: WE ARE ALREADY ON THE PATH AND WE HAVE PROSED CARBON FREE BY 2040.

WE'LL LOOK AS PART OF THE MERGER TO BE THERE AT 2035 AND SO, AS PAT SAID, WE NEED BATTERY TECHNOLOGY AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY TO COME ALONG AND FILL THE GAP.

AND THAT WILL BE IMPORTANT BUT WE ARE ALL CONFIDENT WITH THE DOLLARS AND MONEY THAT IS GOING IN, THAT THAT WILL HAPPEN.

IN THE NEAR TERM IT IS CONTINUING TO LOOK FOR THOSE RENEWABLE RESOURCES, WHETHER THEY ARE BATTERY, WIND OR SOLAR.

AT THE SAME TIME, BALANCING OUR RELIABILITY.

WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE TO BE RELIABLE.

WE'LL CONTINUE TO BALANCE THAT, BUT AS WE LOOK IN THE FUTURE, YOU'LL SEE AN ENERGY SECTOR AND IT IS NOT JUST IN NEW MEXICO.

IT WILL BE IN THE WEST.

BUT I AM CONVINCED THERE WILL BE NEW TECHNOLOGY ALONG THERE AS WELL.

SO THE BATTERY, THE WIND, THE SOLAR.

PUMP STORAGE IS ANOTHER ELEMENT.

THERE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT OTHER SET OF FACTORS THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT WILL CONTINUE, AS INNOVATION CONTINUES TO KICK IN.

I KNOW THAT IBERDROLA IS HEAVILY INVESTED.

THEY HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR 20 YEARS.

THEY WERE WELL IN FRONT OF THE CURVE IN EUROPE AND THEY HAVE INVESTED AND CONTINUE TO INVEST IN NEW TECHNOLOGY.

THAT WILL BE A HUGE BENEFITS WE GET, IS WE CAN LEVERAGE SOME OF THAT TECHNOLOGY THAT THEY ARE WELL DOWN THE PATH ON.

Laura: COULD YOU TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE SPECIFICS WE MIGHT SEE ON THE GROUND AND ALSO IF THAT ELECTRICITY GENERATED BY RENEWABLE SOURCES IS FOR NEW MEXICANS, FOR EXPORT.

KIND OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT?

Blazquez: I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT NEW MEXICO, WHAT CAN YOU SEE?

IMMEDIATELY, WE HAVE THE RESOURCES TO TALK TO THE GOVERNOR TO TALK TO THE OTHER PARTIES, TO TALK TO THE PUBLIC COMMISSION, YOU KNOW, OUTSIDE OF REGULATIONS, OUTSIDE OF REGULATIONS, THERE ARE MANY OPTIONS.

TAKE ENERGY.

CALIFORNIA NEEDS ENERGY, NEW MEXICO NEEDS ENERGY.

IT IS A QUESTION OF WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO?

WE ARE TRANSMISSION BUILDERS.

THERE IS NEED FOR TRANSMISSION EVERYWHERE, BECAUSE ELECTRICITY IS THE SOURCES ARE THERE BUT THEY ARE NOT CONNECTED.

THE QUESTION IS WHAT NEW MEXICO WANTS TO BENEFIT FROM.

IF YOU WANT TO BENEFIT FROM SOME THINGS DON'T LET JUST PEOPLE TO BUILD ASSETS, OWN THEM AND BE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

MAKE SURE THEY BECOME LOCAL.

THAT IS WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO.

MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS IN NEW MEXICO, THE EMPLOYMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REMAINS THERE.

WE HAVE DONE THAT EVERYWHERE WE GO.

OFF SHORE, YOU SEE THE OFF SHORED WIND DEVELOPMENT IN THE U.S.

I THINK WE ARE GOING TO BE ONE OF THE THREE OR FOUR PLAYERS IN THE U.S.

DOING OFF SHORE WIND.

WE NEED A LOT OF BACKUP WORK, ENGINEERING, YOU KNOW, CENTERS, ET CETERA.

WE HAVE CONTROL CENTERS IN GLASGOW.

WE HAVE CONTROL CENTERS IN TOLEDO, SPAIN.

YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE THAT WHERE THE OFF SHORE WIND ASSETS ARE.

OF COURSE, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE THINGS IN MASSACHUSETTS.

OF COURSE, WE WILL HAVE THINGS IN THE CAROLINAS BUT WE WILL HAVE OTHER THINGS IN OTHER PLACES.

SO I THINK WE WILL BRING THE OPPORTUNITY TO NEW MEXICO TO START DOING THINGS THAT OTHERWISE YOU WILL MISS THAT WAY.

I THINK WE ARE THE TYPE OF PEOPLE THAT CAN HELP NEW MEXICO TO BE PART OF THOSE TAKES AHEAD OF US.

Laura: WE TALKED RECENTLY TO A REPORTER OF THE DAILY NEWS IN MAINE.

AVANGRID HAS BEEN THERE FOR ABOUT A DECADE.

AND ONE OF THE ISSUES HE POINTED OUT WAS PROBLEMS WITH BILLINGS AFTER A BATCH OF SERIOUS STORMS AND THEN THE RECENT STORY THAT THE PRESS COVERED THAT CUSTOMERS SAW THEIR BILLS INCREASE BY 35% IN JULY.

THESE ARE THE KIND OF THINGS THAT MAKE NEW MEXICANS A LITTLE BIT NERVOUS.

CAN YOU ASSURE CUSTOMERS IN NEW MEXICO THAT THESE SAME KIND OF PROBLEMS, CUSTOMER SERVICE, RATE INCREASES WON'T HAPPEN HERE?

Blazquez: LET ME JUST GO ONE BY ONE BECAUSE I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE EXPLAIN WHAT IT IS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE WAY YOU PUT IT THERE IS NOT REALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING.

THE FIRST THING IS WE CHANGED THE BILLING SYSTEM IN MAINE.

IF YOU ASK ANY UTILITY OPERATOR, WHEN YOU CHANGE THE BILLING SYSTEM, YOU HAVE A REAL MESS.

OKAY?

BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT AND IT WAS TIME TO DO IT.

IT IS NOW 19 MONTHS, NONSTOP WITH NO ISSUE, ZERO.

SO, IF YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO AND THREE YEARS AGO WHEN WE CHANGED THE BILLING SYSTEM, I AGREE.

BUT WE HAVE TO DO IT.

WE ARE PROUD HOW THE WORK WAS DONE BY THE LOCAL PEOPLE.

WE PUT ADDITIONAL EFFORTS.

19 MONTHS WITH NO ISSUE.

SO, WE ARE COMFORTABLE ABOUT WHAT IT IS.

SECOND, REFERRING TO RATE INCREASES, WE ARE RIGHT NOW GOING TO THE PUBLIC COMMISSION IN MAINE BECAUSE THE RATE INCREASE COMING UP NOW IS BECAUSE OF THE GENERATION PIECE OF THE BILL.

IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE NETWORKS.

OKAY.

BECAUSE OF GAS PRICES, BECAUSE OF GENERATION FEES HAS GONE UP MATERIALLY.

IT IS NOT BECAUSE OF THE NETWORK AND ALSO YOU HAVE TRANSMISSION PRIORITY IN NEW ENGLAND THAT ARE LOCATED TO MAINE BECAUSE THEY BENEFIT FROM THAT.

THAT IS NOT BECAUSE OF CENTRAL MAINE POWER.

THAT IS ANOTHER EXAMPLE, IT IS NOT WHAT WE ARE DOING.

IT THINGS YOU HAVE TO PUT ON THE BILL FOR OTHER PEOPLE.

THIRD, WE HAD SOME VERY STRONG COMPETITION FROM LEGISLATURES IN MAINE TO A TRANSMISSION LINE FROM CANADA INTO MASSACHUSETTS.

THAT IS FUNDED BY THE NUCLEAR OPERATORS IN THE REGION.

THEY DON'T WANT ANY GENERATION THERE.

WHY?

HYDRO IS VERY CHEAP.

IT DOESN'T BRING ANY ELECTRICITY INTO NORTHERN MAINE, NEW ENGLAND.

THE PRICES REMAIN VERY HIGH.

YOU MAKE A LOT OF MONEY.

THAT IS WHY THE POSITION WE HAVE IS FUNDED BY FOSSIL GENERATORS THAT THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE NOTHING IS BUILT, NOTHING, NO GENERATION, NO TRANSMISSION LINE TO BRING POWER, ET CETERA.

IN MAINE WE ARE THE BEST OPERATOR IN RELIABILITY ON SERVICE BY FAR.

IF YOU COMPARE US WITH MAINE, EMERA MAINE, WHO WAS APPROVED BY THE PUBLIC COMMISSION TO BUY, AS YOU KNOW, A UTILITY IN NEW MEXICO, WE ARE MUCH BETTER OPERATOR THAN THEY ARE.

AND THE PUBLIC COMMISSION APPROVED THEM AS WELL WE ARE VERY COMFORTABLE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE PENALTIES, NOT IN MAINE, BUT IN NEW ENGLAND, I THINK WE HAVE THE LOWEST PENALTIES IS BECAUSE THE REGULATORY SYSTEM.

THE PENALTIES CAN BE NEGATIVE OR ACTUALLY RATE INCREASES.

SO YOU HAVE BOTH AND WE HAVE BOTH SITUATIONS.

WE ARE THE BEST AND LOWEST PENALTY IN NEW YORK, IN CONNECTICUT AND MAINE, WE ARE THE BEST OPERATOR.

FINALLY, IN TERMS OF THE STORMS, I MEAN, WE GOT LAST YEAR, YOU KNOW, THE PRIZE FOR THE BEST STORM REACTION OPERATOR.

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND IN MAINE, IN NEW ENGLAND AND NEW YORK AND CONNECTICUT WE USED TO HAVE ONE HURRICANE EVERY FIVE YEARS.

WE ARE HAVING TWO OR THREE MAJOR STORMS NOW A YEAR.

INFRASTRUCTURE IS 50, 60, 70 YEARS OLD.

WE ARE PROUD TO RECEIVE THOSE AWARDS.

I THINK WE HAVE BEEN CONGRATULATED BY THE GOVERNORS IN THOSE STATES AND PUT AS EXAMPLE IN CONNECTICUT AND MAINE AND I THINK IN THE CASE OF MAINE, AS I SAID TO YOU, WE ARE ALREADY 19 MONTHS WITH NO ISSUE BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN THE BILLING SYSTEM.

Laura: THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH FOR TALKING WITH ME.

I APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO WALK THROUGH SOME OF THESE REALLY COMPLICATED ISSUES.

Blazquez: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

Gene: THE INTERSECTION BETWEEN FAITH AND POLITICS IS BECOMING MORE OF A FLASH POINT IN RECENT MONTHS, AFTER A DISCUSSION IN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH CENTERED AROUND PRESIDENT BIDEN AND STATE LAWMAKERS LIKE JOE CERVANTES TAKING THE SACRAMENT AT MASS WHILE PUBLICLY SUPPORTING A WOMAN'S RIGHT TO CHOOSE.

WE'LL TOUCH ON ANOTHER EXAMPLE GAINING ATTENTION HERE IN NEW MEXICO IN A MOMENT BUT LET'S TURN OUR PANEL FIRST TO WHAT RESPONSIBILITIES SHOULD RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS TAKE WHEN IT COMES TO ADDRESSING INDIVIDUAL POLITICAL FIGURES, EITHER POSITIVELY OR NEGATIVELY.

SOPHIE?

Sophie: THE CONTEXT FOR THIS IS THAT PASTOR SMOTHERMAN AT A LOCAL ALBUQUERQUE MEGA CHURCH MADE STATEMENTS FROM THE PULPIT, REPORTED TO HAVE MADE STATEMENTS FROM THE PULPIT IN SUPPORT OF A CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATE WHO HAPPENED TO BE AT THE CHURCH THAT DAY AND APPARENTLY TABLED IN THE HALLWAY OUTSIDE OF THE SERVICE.

AND THIS PASTOR APPARENTLY WAS PRETTY OVERT IN SAYING, YOU KNOW, YOU SHOULD BE VOTING FOR THIS PARTICULAR CANDIDATE.

THERE IS SORT OF A FORMULA THAT CHURCHES HAVE FOLLOWED IN PROBABLY ABOUT THE LAST 20 YEARS OF HOW THEY ARE SORT OF PRESSING UP AGAINST THE LIMITS OF THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT, BEING 1954, AMENDMENT TO THE TAX CODE THAT BASICALLY SAID, IF YOU'RE A TAX EXEMPT CHURCH OR NONPROFIT, YOU CAN'T ENGAGE IN POLITICAL SPEECH.

THERE HAS BEEN A FAIR AMOUNT OF PUSH BACK OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS.

THE FORMULA THAT SEEMS TO BE WORKING FOR CHURCHES AND IT IS INTERESTING TO SEE HOW CLOSE SMOTHERMAN GOT TO THIS, YOU KNOW, OUR CHURCH SUPPORTS A PARTICULAR LAW OR PARTICULAR IDEA.

THIS POLITICIAN ALSO SUPPORTS IT WHILE THIS OTHER POLITICIAN DOES NOT, BE SURE TO VOTE YOUR VALUES.

CHURCHES HAVE GOTTEN AWAY WITH THAT.

IT IS UNCLEAR TO ME WHETHER THAT IS BECAUSE THE IRS DOES NOT REALLY HAVE THE RESOURCES OR THE TEMPERAMENT EVEN TO ENFORCE THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT.

BUT IT SEEMS TO ME THAT ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT WE SAW THIS WEEK ACTUALLY IN THE SUPREME COURT AND ARGUMENT REGARDING ABORTION RIGHTS, THAT THERE MAY BE AN INCREASE COMING OF CHURCHES PUSHING UP AGAINST THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT TO SEE IF THEY CAN ACTUALLY GET THEIR WAY ON THAT AND GET THAT OVERTURNED.

IT IS AN INTERESTING TIME.

NOT JUST BECAUSE OF THE BIDEN CATHOLIC CHURCH THING, BUT IT'S ALSO THIS SUPREME COURT SEEMS PRIMED AND HAS ALREADY SHOWN IT IS WILLING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL RIGHTS, MAYBE NOT THE RIGHT WAY TO PUT IT, BUT TO BE MORE DEFERENTIAL TOWARDS RELIGION, AND, IN PARTICULAR, CHRISTIANITY THAN COURTS IN THE PAST.

Gene: HEY, CATHY LET ME READ WHAT PASTOR SMOTHERMAN WAS REPORTED SAYING IN SUPPORT OF LORI ROBERTSON.

SHE'S THE REPUBLICAN RUNNING AGAINST TAMMY FIEBELKORN TO REPLACE DIANE GIBSON.

INTERESTING QUOTE.

WE NEED PEOPLE LIKE HER, ROBERTSON, SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE, ON THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE SURE THIS CRAZY GUY THEY CALL MAYOR DOESN'T CONTINUE TO PUSH HIS AGENDA.

WOW.

I MEAN IF THIS ISN'T POLITICKING, I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS.

YOUR SENSE OF THAT IN SITTING AS A CHURCH GOER.

WOULD YOU APPRECIATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT IF YOU WERE SITTING IN THE CONGREGATION?

Cathryn: YOU KNOW, MY FATHER WAS A PASTOR AND KIND OF WHAT HE SAID WAS THE GOSPEL TO MANY PEOPLE THAT WERE SITTING IN THE PEWS.

AND THAT IS THE SAME THING THAT IS TRUE HERE AND, YOU KNOW, JUST REMINDS ME OF ALL THE OTHER THINGS WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE, ABOUT HOW PEOPLE ARE ABUSING THEIR AUTHORITY.

AND I THINK THAT IS A CLEAR CASE OF THAT AND THAT HE KNOWS IT AND IS PRETTY DEFIANT ABOUT THE FACT THAT I CAN DO IT IF I WANT.

THAT REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

Gene: GOOD POINT.

IF THERE ISN'T ANY LEGAL ACTION FOLLOWING UP ON THIS, WILL THIS SITUATION HAVE A REALISTIC IMPACT IN THE OUTCOME OF THE DISTRICT 7 RUNOFF?

Dan: I GOT TO TELL YOU, I GO TO CHURCH THERE AND I WAS THERE THE DAY THIS HAPPENED.

I HAVE KNOWN SMOTHERMAN FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS NOW AND I WOULD TELL YOU HIS COMMENTS IN CHURCH ARE GOING TO HAVE FAR LESS IMPACT ON THE OUTCOME OF THE RACE THAN THE MEDIA COVERAGE HAS ON HIS COMMENTS FOR THE OUTCOME OF THE RACE.

THAT HAS GOTTEN 10 FOLDS THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT AND LISTENING ABOUT THIS AND SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT JUST LIKE A BELIEF OF MINE WITH CAPITALISM AND OTHER THINGS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, YOU KNOW WHAT, IF PEOPLE DON'T LIKE WHAT STEVE SMOTHERMAN SAYS IN CHURCH, THEN DON'T GO TO THAT CHURCH, AND JUDGING BY THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE ATTENDING HIS CHURCH, HE HAS GOT PRETTY GOOD SUPPORTERS.

SO IT IS NOT LIKE WE ARE LACKING CHURCHES TO VISIT IN NEW MEXICO ESPECIALLY ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO.

SO, I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, HIM SAYING THAT HE IS VOTING FOR SOMEBODY, HIM SAYING THAT THE MAYOR IS CRAZY, HIM SAYING THAT WE NEED MORE PEOPLE LIKE THIS PERSON ON THE CITY COUNCIL, I THINK THE REASON YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF WORK, IN MY NONLEGAL OPINION, WITH THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT, IT IS A VERY, VERY TOUGH SLOPE FOR THOSE GUYS TO GO INTO ANY COURT AND TRY TO DECIDE INTENT OF WHAT SOMEBODY SAID, WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS OF WHAT THEY SAID.

I THINK IT IS A DIFFICULT STEP FOR THEM.

I THINK THE DAY THAT A PASTOR GETS UP THERE AND SAYS THAT PERSON, DON'T VOTE FOR THEM, VOTE FOR THIS PERSON.

IF YOU WOULDN'T VOTE FOR THIS PERSON, THESE ARE THINGS THAT WILL HAPPEN.

THOSE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE GETTING IN TROUBLE.

EVERYTHING ELSE THAT IS DANCING AROUND THE WHOLE, I AM FOR THIS PERSON, THAT PERSON IS NOT DOING WHAT WE WANT, ALL THE SCENARIOS WE SAID, I THINK, THE IRS, IT DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A FIGHT THAT THEY EVER WANTED TO TAKE UP.

I AM NOT SURE THAT THEY EVER WILL.

Gene: I SEE YOU BOTH KATHY.

REAL QUICK, THE REGULATIONS ARE PRETTY CLEAR ON THIS, DAN.

YOU CAN'T DO BE DOING THESE KIND OF THINGS BECAUSE THESE ENTITIES UNDER THE LAW ARE ABSOLUTELY PROHIBITED FROM DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY PARTICIPATING IN OR INTERVENING IN ANY POLITICAL CAMPAIGN ON BEHALF OF OR IN OPPOSITION TO ANY CANDIDATES FOR ELECTED PUBLIC OFFICE.

THAT SEEMS PRETTY CLEAR, SOPHIE.

Sophie: I THINK SO TOO.

I WILL SAY THAT IT GOES BEYOND -- THE IMPACT OF THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT GOES BEYOND SOMEONE SPEAKING FROM THE FRONT OF A CHURCH AND GOES INTO ISSUES OF FUNDING AND IN PARTICULAR DARK FUNDING FOR POLITICAL ACTIVITY.

CHURCHES ALSO UNDER THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT ARE NOT ABLE TO SPEND MONEY ON POLITICAL PAM PAINS OR POLITICAL CAMPAIGNS AND ISSUES AND YOU SEE THIS MAYBE MOST CLEARLY ACTUALLY AMONG NONPROFITS.

NAACP, THEY HAVE THEIR CHARITABLE ARM.

YOU CAN GIVE MONEY TO CHARITABLE ACTIVITIES BUT THERE IS A SEPARATE LEGAL DEFENSE FUND THAT IS NOT TAX EXEMPT.

BECAUSE CHURCHES ARE NOT REQUIRED TO DIVULGE WHO GIVES THEM MONEY, IF THEY ARE UNENCUMBERED BY THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT SUCH THEY CAN SPEND MONEY WHICH IS CONSIDERED SPEECH IN OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM THAT THEN BECOMES AN AVENUE FOR DARK MONEY THAT CAN'T BE TRACKED AND THIS IS ONE OF THE REAL CONCERNS ABOUT CHIPPING AWAY AT THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT.

WE FOCUS ON THE SPEECH OF INDIVIDUAL PASTORS, INDIVIDUAL RELIGIOUS LEADERS WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE CHURCH, WHETHER THEY CROSSED THE LINE, BUT THIS IS THE DARK UNDER BELLY.

Gene: CATHY, I GOT TO WONDER IF THE LOSER HERE HAS A LEGAL CASE.

YOU KNOW.

DAN MENTIONED BEFORE, YOU KNOW, IT MAY NOT BE AS IMPACTFUL AS PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO MAKE THIS OUT TO BE, BUT IF SHE LOSES, MIGHT SHE NOT HAVE AN AVENUE TO COME BACK AND SAY, THE NONPROFIT STATUS OF THE CHURCH RIGHT HERE SHOULD BE UNDER QUESTION.

Cathryn: I THINK MAYBE SHE WOULD, BUT WHAT I WOULD SAY TO IS THERE IS NOT A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE ARE EVEN AWARE OF THE FACT WE HAVE THESE RUNOFF ELECTIONS COMING.

I THINK ITS OKAY FOR US TO BE TALKING ABOUT IT, DEFINITELY IT IS OKAY FOR US TO BE TALKING ABOUT THIS ISSUE MORE BROADLY AS SOPHIE MENTIONED.

AND I JUST KEEP GOING BACK TO PEOPLE GO AND READ.

THERE IS A BOOK CALLED ONE NATION UNDER GOD, HOW CORPORATE AMERICA INVENTED CHRISTIAN AMERICA.

AND IT TALKS ABOUT CHRISTIAN LIBERTARIANISM AND HOW CAPITALISM AND CHRISTIANITY HAVE BECOME INEXTRICABLY BOUND AND HOW PASTORS SORT OF DO THESE KIND OF THINGS FROM THE PULPIT.

SO, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE CONTEXT OF HOW THESE THINGS ARE HAPPENING, WHY THEY ARE HAPPENING AND WHAT THE HARM IS.

JUST LIKE DAN SAID, IF WE DON'T LIKE WHAT SMOTHERMAN SAYS, WE DON'T HAVE GO TO CHURCH THERE.

IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE AN ABORTION, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE ONE, BUT WE DON'T NECESSARILY NEED LAWS SAYING YOU CAN'T HAVE ONE.

Gene: THANK YOU ALL FOR THIS DISCUSSION.

IT HAS BEEN REALLY INTERESTING THIS WEEK.

BE SURE TO LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT ANY OF THE TOPICS THE LINE COVERED THIS WEEK ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER OR INSTAGRAM PAGES.

YOU CAN ALSO WATCH OUR PAST FACEBOOK LIVE INTERVIEWS INCLUDING MY CHAT ABOUT THE UPCOMING SPECIAL AT THE ROUND HOUSE IN SANTA FE.

AS YOU HEARD IN THE DISCUSSION EARLIER, THE NEW COVID VARIANT DISCOVERED FIRST IN SOUTH AFRICA IS STATE SIDE, WHICH WAS INEVITABLE GIVEN HOW WE TRAVEL.

IT IS ALSO INEVITABLE THE OMICRON VARIANT WILL ARRIVE IN NEW MEXICO SOON ENOUGH.

THE BIGGER ISSUE FOR ME IS HOW WE DEAL WITH THAT ARRIVAL.

WILL THIS SPUR MORE MASK USE AND BOOSTER SHOTS OR ARE WE IN FOR ANOTHER ROUND OF DENIALS, CONSPIRACY THEORIES AND A WIDENING OF THE CULTURAL DIVIDE AS A RESULT.

YOU RECALL A YEAR AGO THE SPECTER OF NEW VARIANTS DOWN THE ROAD HAVING A BETTER SHOT AT TAKING ROOT WITHOUT MORE MASK USE WAS A HARD SELL FOR SOME.

BUT HERE WE ARE DOWN THAT ROAD WITH ANOTHER ROUND OF BORDER AND TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND A LOT MORE POSSIBLE IN THE FUTURE.

PERHAPS IT IS NOT AS HARD A SELL NOW.

WE CAN ONLY HOPE.

THANKS FOR JOINING US AND STAYING INFORMED AND ENGAGED.

WE'LL SEE YOU AGAIN NEXT WEEK, IN FOCUS.