>> Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by viewers like you.

>> Nash: This week on New Mexico in Focus, conflicting visions for one of the nation's most closely watched races in this year's election.

>> Vasquez: What ICE is doing to profile especially Hispanic New Mexicans across our state is completely unacceptable.

It's un-American.

It's got to stop.

>> Cunningam: So Gabe Vasquez has, to this day, will say he wants to hold ICE agents accountable.

What does that mean?

>> Nash: The second Congressional District gets the spotlight with the power balance in the US House sitting on the head of a pin.

New Mexico in Focus starts now.

Thanks for joining us I'm Nash Jones.

We have probably got the biggest episode of our month long run of election coverage for you tonight, as we wade into the highly charged fight for the seat that is flipped between parties most frequently in recent years.

If the two elections since Congressional District two was redrawn five years ago are any indication, it's going to be a close one between incumbent Democratic Representative Gabe Vasquez and his Republican challenger, Greg Cunningham.

An Albuquerque Journal poll out this week has the spread at four points, 48 to 44%, with Vasquez out ahead but within the margin of error.

That said, Vasquez has a much bigger lead in the district's two population centers, with the Las Cruces Democrat up 21 points in his hometown and 14% in Cunningham's, The South Valley of Albuquerque.

Vasquez has weathered close elections before, though.

If it does come down to that, voters in what has historically been considered the southern New Mexico district first elected him to Congress by a razor thin margin in 2022.

He beat then incumbent one term Republican congresswoman Yvette Harrell by less than 1%.

That was the first election after New Mexico's Democratic controlled legislature redrew the district's boundaries after the 2020 census.

Now, I said CD2 was historically considered the Southern District.

That's the version on your screen now.

As you can see, it used to comprise all of southern New Mexico and none of Albuquerque.

But in 2021, the legislature redrew it to include Albuquerque's South Valley and parts of the West Side.

It also lost a good chunk of southeastern New Mexico to the other districts, with Albuquerque's South Valley being deeply democratic in the southeast patch one of the reddest parts of the state.

Those changes swung the district considerably to the left.

The state Republican Party sued the legislature's Democratic leaders for gerrymandering, accusing them of illegally redrawing the district to guarantee their party's victory.

And while state district judge found that New Mexico Democrats did try to dilute Republican votes there, and that they had substantial success in doing so, their efforts did not, quote, rise to the level of an egregious gerrymander, noting how very close the Democrat actually came to losing the first time that map was used in 2022.

So the map stayed put, and Vasquez won again in 2024, a rematch with Herrell, this time by a wider but still close four point margin.

And that brings us to this year's midterm, where gerrymandering is yet again playing a role, but this time nationally.

After a mid-decade tug of war between both parties netted the Republicans an additional nine safe House districts as they white knuckled their slim majority.

And that has brought national attention to this New Mexico contest, where the GOP has hopes of flipping Vasquez's seat in a district that leans blue but is by no means a safe bet for the Dems.

Democratic former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg and Republican Speaker of the House Mike Johnson have come out to New Mexico to stump for their candidates.

And as President, Trump encourages voters to pretend he's on the ballot despite his abysmal approval rating.

He's also given the New Mexico Republican a full throated endorsement.

I'll ask Cunningham about that, along with where he stands on an array of key issues a little later in the show.

But we begin tonight with the first part of my interview with the incumbent, Democratic Representative Gabe Vasquez.

>> Nash: Representative Vasquez, thanks so much for making the time to come here, really appreciate it.

So, your District was one of just 13 in the country in 2024 that went for President Trump, but also elected a Democrat to the House, namely, yourself.

How have you navigated representing such a purple District?

>> Vasquez: Yeah, it's a really unique District.

It includes, of course, the southeast, the southwest, central New Mexico, southern New Mexico.

Every single county has different issues that they face.

And my approach to this job has been to make sure I show up in every single county red or blue, conservative, liberal, progressive, you name it.

I show up and I asked folks, how can I serve you?

So, I've been able to accomplish a lot of things for a lot of different counties, address a lot of different issues.

I believe that's why I got the support and stronger support than in 2022.

Although President Trump won this District, folks really understood that I was there to listen that I care, and most importantly, that I delivered.

>> Nash: An analysis by Roll Call earlier this year showed you voted for the President's position on issues a quarter of the time, which was far more than your colleagues in the rest of the states congressional delegation.

What's your message to progressives or disaffected Trump voters in your District?

If they want a stronger, more consistent check on the President, why you're voting the way that you are?

>> Vasquez: Well, I think that we have gotten into these toxic Partisan politics in Washington, D.C., that have really impeded progress, that have divided Americans, not just in Washington, in Congress, but in our communities all across the country.

And frankly, I'm sick of it because nothing gets done.

And when this administration has a good idea, when they propose something like the 21st Century Affordable Housing Act, which I supported to make housing more available and cheaper to all Americans, I will support the President.

There's a lot of issues, the majority of issues that I don't support that this administration has done.

But for the sake of Partisan and voting with my party -- look, there's plenty of things I agree with my party on, but there's other things that I break with my party on because my job is to represent the constituents of my District, and things look a lot different here than they do in New York City or in Los Angeles.

And so I'm going to continue to vote in the best interest of my District.

>> Nash: Okay.

Now, your challenger, Greg Cunningham, he's a former police officer who█s criticized your lack of support for law enforcement, citing the statement that you made before serving in Congress about the need to defund the police.

However, your record shows that you have repeatedly voted to fund police, and it brought home millions in federal grants for local law enforcement as well.

What is the role of police in keeping District 2 safe, and how much funding do they need to do that?

>> Vasquez: Yeah, one of the challenges we face right now is in particular with rural community policing, right?

With rural communities, from our tribal communities to our Pueblos to places like like Fence Lake in Hillsboro and Lake Valley, we have a shortage of police officers in our rural departments.

The pay is not competitive enough.

We simply can't compete with what the state is paying, with what local municipalities are paying.

And so we're seeing less and less recruits, less and less cadets.

So we need to be able to shore up the budgets of those counties to be able to pay their sheriffs and those respective deputies to be able to fill out those police departments.

>> Nash: How do you measure what the right number of police officers is for -- >> Vasquez: Yeah.

>> Nash: Certain areas?

>> Vasquez: Well, when you look at response times as an example, right.

If it's taking 45 minutes for police response in the village of To'Hajiilee, Navajo reservation to respond to a violent incident that is far too long, right.

And so what's the solution there?

Well, part of that is working through BIA, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, working through the Navajo Police Department and working with cross commissioning of the Bernalillo County Sheriff's Department to be able to respond to that.

You know, we can get creative with different ways, but ultimately it is looking at crime stats, looking at crime rates, looking at response times, and looking at what our sheriffs and our local police departments are telling us are adequate staffing numbers based on their population.

>> Nash: Alright, your District obviously also includes the border with Mexico, which you grew up on, both sides of as a first generation Mexican-American born in El Paso.

You have called for reforms and accountability for ICE >> Vasquez: Yes.

>> Nash: What's come of those efforts?

>> Vasquez: Well, honestly, more needs to come because it's getting worse across the country and across the New Mexico.

I mean, we've seen just the raids recently -- we don't have to go through this cruelty through this exercise of detention and deportation to oftentimes unknown foreign countries.

And, honestly, the suffering of family seperation that we see all across the country.

There's a better way to do it.

And what ICE is doing to profile, especially Hispanic New Mexicans across our state is completely unacceptable.

It's un-American, it's got to stop and -- >> Nash: What's a better way to do it?

What's the better way to utilize Immigration and Customs Enforcement?

>> Vasquez: Yeah, well, look, this President broke his promise to deport only the violent criminals, to deport only those who have committed serious crimes in this country.

A better way to do it is actually to target those violent offenders, and look -- >> Nash: In terms of targeting those -- if that is not happening, where is the disconnect?

Is it at the systems level?

Is it a training issue with the agents?

>> Vasquez: It's both.

I mean, the artificial quotas that are being propped up.

In fact, just recently, Stephen Miller, I'm assuming, has worked with the President to say we need 1000 more deportations per day leading up to the midterm elections.

I think that's actually going to hurt Republicans.

And so that means that anybody who's a bystander, right, even if they are targeting a violent criminal, but there happens to be somebody else that█s undocumented or looks undocumented, they're going to pick that person up without care.

The second thing is untrained agents, right.

That's one of the things we have to investigate going into the new Congress in a majority.

The number of stories and the number of reports that I have seen from agents who are completely and wholly untrained to do this job, who right now are violating people's civil and constitutional rights, is completely unacceptable simply to get the numbers up of this mass deportation force.

>> Nash: And earlier this year, you penned an article entitled, Both Parties Have Failed on Immigration: It's Time for a New American Immigration Plan.

And in it, you said, the immigration system can be better, more humane, more predictable and safer, how?

>> Vasquez: Well, I think it starts by reforming our entire visa system.

I'll use my grandma as an example.

It took her using a family visa petition, right.

Which is a standard procedure.

It's essentially when people say “get in line”, right?

My grandma got in line, 16 years that it took her to get a visa.

The legal way.

Meanwhile, during the Biden administration, asylum seekers, who came to the border in massive numbers were given job authorization, were given places to essentially stay.

And folks like my grandma and others along the border, folks who have been waiting in line throught the process were very frustrated that they felt like they were cheating the system, right.

And so, that was during a time when Democrats controlled the administration, when the Obama administration was here and we had a supermajority in the Senate, we put immigration on the back burner.

We said it was not the most prominent issue for us to deal with when we had the 60 votes in the Senate to do so.

That's something that personally for me is unacceptable.

And so both parties have gotten it wrong when we've had a chance to do it.

We have failed the American people, and now we're seeing the consequences of it.

So, we've got to reverse course.

>> Nash: And you've been in Congress for two terms now.

What have you worked towards in terms of tangible changes to the immigration system?

>> Vasquez: Well, let me highlight one particular bill that I just introduced.

It's called the Care Worker Visa Act.

Now, this is particular to New Mexico.

And this is a bill that actually came from conversations with a group of women that I had in Chaparral, New Mexico.

There's 15,000 kids right now that can't get that universal childcare that we now have in New Mexico, thanks to the -- to the work of the State Legislature, because there's a shortage of child care workers.

Childcare isn't just expensive for Americans across the country, but so is elder care or care for people with disabilities.

My bill would open up 100,000 new visas for existing folks that don't have documentation or folks to petition to have a family caregiver.

So if you wanted to hire somebody at your home as an example, you could petition that person to work with you, with your family, to take care of your child for up to three years and then be able to achieve legal status in this country, essentially legal, permanent residency.

Now, those women that said, we have the people to fill the jobs we can█t fill -- we can't have these home based health care centers that can fill the need of New Mexicans so that more people have opportunities to work and to go to school.

That is a common sense way that I think Republicans and Democrats can agree that we can make childcare less expensive by reforming our broken immigration system.

>> Nash: And is the goal that legal, permanent status -- I mean, pathway to citizenship has been on the table for decades.

Is it realistic that we could get there?

>> Vasquez: Absolutely.

So, when you get your legal permanent residency status, you then become eligible to apply for citizenship.

There's hundreds of thousands of legal permanent residents across the country, including right here in New Mexico.

Essentially, they have Green Cards, right?

Under this administration, they're actually at risk and danger of deportation according to the executive orders that this administration and this President had put out.

We want them to become citizens, you know, to be afforded the full protection under the law of this constitution of being a citizen.

So once they become legal permanent residents, they then have that opportunity to become citizens of this nation, which ultimately benefits us all because we are a nation of immigrants.

And I don't think there's a District that█s more reflective of that than New Mexico 2 or especially along the border.

We see the history, that binational history that is as American as apple pie.

>> Nash: Congressman, thanks for your time.

I'm going to ask you to stick around, we've got a few more questions for you, kind of looking towards the future if you were to be re-elected.

>> Nash: Thank you.

>> Vasquez: Thank you so much.

>> Vasquez: Bottom line, 10,000 New Mexican kids today don't have access to food from Snap benefits.

That's $6 a day, right?

And I showed my colleagues what $6 a day buys you in New Mexico.

That's a can of pinto beans.

That's a small bag of tortillas.

And that's maybe a can of green chili that that kid has to eat for three meals.

Taking that away is completely cruel for a child.

>> Nash: Catch the second part of my interview with Congressman Gabe Vasquez, when we shift over to his plans for the future, in a little over ten minutes.

Greg Cunningham was a combat marine in Iraq before beginning a two decade career at the Albuquerque Police Department, where he was best known as a detective.

Born and raised in Albuquerque, South Valley, Cunningham has twice tried his hand at politics, losing both times to Democratic Representative Joy Garrett for a seat in the state House.

He's back this time with his eyes on a bigger prize.

Congress.

I sat down with the candidate for a wide ranging interview about why he believes he's right for the job.

We begin with his resume and how it might prepare him for a seat in Washington, D.C.. >> Nash: Greg Cunningham, welcome to New Mexico in Focus, thanks for making the time.

>> Cunningham: Thank you for having me.

It's an honor being here.

>> Nash: Yeah, absolutely.

So, your resume includes being a Marine combat veteran, a former police officer.

How does your background prepare you to serve as a member of Congress?

>> Cunningham: Well -- going back to that, I was born and raised here in Albuquerque, joined the Marine Corps in 1987.

It took me about two years to get all my Recon Schools in and my certifications in.

I came home -- enrolled back in school.

I accepted the invitation to go on a ride-along with a friend of mine who was an Albuquerque police officer, and that was it, the bug bit.

I knew what I wanted to do.

It was just the focus of my life and my career.

So I joined the Albuquerque Police Department.

I did 20 years there -- was a Task Force Officer at DEA, so I have worked at the federal level doing drug narcotics work.

I worked at the border.

I've done search warrants all over the state and on the border.

I've done Title Three█s, which are wiretaps.

I've done the undercover work, the surveillance.

And so I have a very hands on and unique approach to what's going on at the border.

After 22 years, I opened my own business.

So I've opened a business.

I've run a successful business.

I know what those challenges are.

And so, that's a very long way of saying -- that those are unique experiences.

Those are very hands-on, and -- experiences that challenge people.

You have to be a problem-solver.

You have to be -- someone that doesn't get deterred very easily.

And so the experiences I had in the Marine Corps, being a Recon Marine and the tough training and the stick-to-it-tivness that you need, being in combat on the other side of the planet instilled characteristics in me that not a lot of people get instilled in them.

>> Nash: Thanks for breaking that all down.

What -- with that background, what brought you to now want to get into politics?

>> Cunningham: Well, quite frankly, it was the pandemic that was -- I attend Legacy Church here in Albuquerque, and at the time, the governor attempted to close churches down, and our pastor got into a very public debate with the governor over closing churches down.

But really, as a former Marine, as a police officer -- I saw what was happening.

I always thought of Americans as a sort of an unruly sort of people like you can't tell us what to do, kind of fabric -- made out of that fabric, and that's not what I was witnessing.

And so, between what I perceived or what has come to -- we know now, our rights being taken away from us being in public service all those years.

This was the next step in that for me.

I saw something wrong.

I knew I could do something about it, and that's what precipitated my run.

>> Nash: And you ran twice -- unsuccessfully, for State House.

You█re now running for US Congress.

And you've said that the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk -- motivated you for this congressional run.

Is that right?

And if so, how so?

>> Cunningham: Going back to Legacy Church and the pandemic?

Charlie Kirk used to come to our church and speak with our congregation, our members, in very intimate settings.

I met him there, and so he was very influential in me -- in my decision making-process and in what formed me as a man and as someone that was entering the public forum.

And so when he was assassinated, that was and again -- I'm going to go back to my Marine and police roots.

He was shot.

And I interpret that as aggression.

That's an act of violence.

That's an act of war, to me.

And based on my training and experience, that requires action.

And so, that required action.

So here I am.

>> Nash: Now, with your background as a police officer, public safety has become a cornerstone of your campaign.

I think that's fair to say.

You gave a speech at the Republican mid-term convention, and in that you said that Democrats have not equipped our police officers with the resources and support that they need to do their jobs.

That said, your opponent Gabe Vasquez, he sites his vote for a $9 billion justice appropriations package with funding for local police and equipment and bringing home nearly $4 million in federal grants for law enforcement upgrades in CD2 specifically, how is Gabe Vasquez falling short of supporting law enforcement?

>> Cunningham: Again, it goes back to my experience.

It goes back to knowing what it actually takes to provide safety for the community.

>> Nash: And what is that?

>> Cunningham: That actual support for the men and women that are doing the job.

>> Nash: Like emotional support beyond funding?

>> Cunningham: No.

Well, they have to know that you have their back.

And so, Gabe Vasquez, to this day will say he wants to hold ICE agents accountable.

What does that mean?

Accountable for what?

And accountable in what way?

So when you're telling uniformed law enforcement officers that are carrying out whatever law, federal, state, local law in this instance is federal law.

When you're telling federal law enforcement officers that you're going to hold them accountable What are you telling them?

>> Nash: Is there not accountability needed for any sworn officer to the law of the land, the Constitution, in this case, and we're talking about a federal officer?

>> Cunningham: Absolutely.

And we are held to a higher standard.

And I believe that should be the case.

And as a police officer, I've worked in some very elite units where we enforced the law with law enforcement officers -- >> Nash: So isn█t that the accountability that you're hearing about?

>> Cunningham: No, what you're telling those law enforcement officers is, “you're doing something wrong.” And that's what we hear.

I'm telling you what we hear -- >> Nash: Like across the board?

>> Cunningham: Yes, I'm telling you what we hear.

As a police officer, when you tell me, “I'm going to hold you accountable for doing your job” what you're telling me and what I hear and the way that's being interpreted is, “you're saying I'm doing something wrong.” “You're going to hold me accountable.” And so, you're putting me at financial risk.

You█re putting me at legal risk, just for doing my job.

>> Nash: And for folks who are now wondering if you will hold law enforcement -- ICE accountable in -- to the extent that you could as a congressman, will you?

>> Cunningham: Well, I just finished telling you that as a part of some very elite units, that was part of -- my responsibilities and part of my duties.

I've done that in the past.

>> Nash: Now, the state legislature redrew the Second Congressional District back in 2021, after the census.

That swung it considerably to the left, in part by including Albuquerque's South Valley.

And that is a neighborhood, as you mentioned, you grew up in, your party has argued that -- District 2 should not include the South Valley, that it's got a different culture, that it's more urban than the traditional Southern New Mexico district.

What would you say to the Republican Party, to individual Republicans who argue that -- somebody from Albuquerque shouldn't be running to represent what has been traditionally the Southern District, a rural District?

>> Cunningham: We don't all have to be the same.

Every community doesn't have to be the same.

Everybody lives in a certain part of the state because that's where they want to live.

That dirt, that land speaks to them.

And that's okay.

We don't have to be the same.

The South Valley is not the same as Hobbs, and that's okay.

But we need to have a common goal and a common cause, and we can do that.

>> Nash: Do you think you'll connect with folks in Hobbs, as you mentioned, as well as somebody like Yvette Herrell, the Republican candidate who formerly served as the Congresswoman for the District and then has since lost twice to Gabe Vasquez.

>> Cunningham: Yes.

I would argue that -- because of my background and because of who I am.

My last name is Cunningham.

My father is from Tennessee.

They are farmers.

They're sharecroppers, I came -- so part of me is from that background.

I understand getting up early and working till the sun goes down.

And that's what those folks down there do.

And so -- we identify and we connect on work ethic on values and on foundations.

And along those lines, I absolutely -- I personify what CD2 is.

>> Nash: Right, now, you are the only candidate running in New Mexico this election cycle that boasts an endorsement from President Trump.

You've said that you will stand with the President if elected.

While your District went for Trump in 2024, his approval rating has plummeted since then.

What do you say to voters who are unhappy with the President's performance about why they should elect a Trump ally to Congress?

>> Cunningham: Okay, well, and again, the use of the word “ally” is -- >> Nash: Is that not fair?

>> Cunningham: At this point, It's not.

No, I mean -- >> Nash: Tell me more -- >> Cunningham: Or even to say, “stand with somebody.” >> Nash: That was what you said in your address to the midterm convention.

>> Cunningham: Yes, and again, that doesn't mean all issues, or everything.

>> Nash: Okay -- When I -- as a Marine, I raised my right hand to take an oath to the Constitution.

As a police officer, I raised my right hand as an oath to the citizens of New Mexico.

And that's who my allegiance is to.

And to say that, just blindly -- that I'm going to stand with or ally with somebody, is incorrect.

>> Nash: Okay.

Where do you -- is there a specific example of a place where you disagree with the President at the moment?

>> Cunningham: The one place -- I would like to see -- it goes back to the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act -- >> Nash: Sure -- >> Cunningham: RECA, the Down Winders, yes.

So, I'm married to a Down Winder.

We are native New Mexicans.

That's an issue that is very important to us.

That needs to be beefed up.

It needs teeth.

We need to streamline the application process.

We need to bump up the award amounts.

We need to provide health care for those that were affected by those poisons that were put into our environment, into our bodies.

And so -- that's the one place I would say that I stand apart and that I stand for New Mexicans.

>> Nash: Yeah, thanks for giving that example.

The President did re-endorse you recently in a video on social media.

He started that video by greeting us all as New America.

How do you feel about the idea of renaming the state?

>> Cunningham: I'm going to go back to my opening statement.

I am a born and raised New Mexican.

That is who I am.

That is who my family is, and that's who we're going to stay.

>> Nash: All right.

[Cunningham laughs] >> Nash: Mr.

Cunningham, thank you.

I'm going to ask you to stick around.

We've got a few more questions for you -- >> Cunningham: Absolutely.

>> Nash: Thanks.

>> Cunningham: I was a recon marine in that part of the world.

I'm going to make decisions very carefully, because I've been one of those people.

And I know that those men and women that are fighting that war right now and their families, nobody wants this to end more than they do, just like when I was there.

But it has to end correctly.

Iran has to give up its nuclear capability and they have to open the strait >> Nash: Stay tuned for the back half of my conversation with Republican congressional candidate Greg Cunningham, as we dig into his policy positions in about 15 minutes.

But first, let's return to Representative Gabe Vasquez.

We left off with the lens wide open on immigration, a key issue for voters in the second district, part of which spans the US Mexico border and one of many points of contention between him and Cunningham.

We're going to stick with that theme, exploring Vasquez's efforts in Congress to push back against President Trump's enforcement and deportation machine, then move on to some other big ticket items that he'd like to tackle in a third term.

>> Nash: Welcome back.

Thanks for staying with us.

So we spoke earlier in the show about your record on immigration and ICE.

I'd like to stick with that topic for just a little bit with a look towards the future.

Were you to be reelected.

So New Mexico has banned state and local governments from contracting directly with Ice for detention.

Despite that, and you have said you fully support that move.

But despite that, all three immigrant prisons in New Mexico remain up and running.

Two of them are in your district.

And when it comes to the Otero County Prison, they have remained contracted with Ice.

Would you like to see an actual end to Ice detention in your district, and if so, how can you help make that happen from Washington?

>> Vasquez: I think the larger question here is how much are private prison corporations making off of this mass deportation effort this administration has put forward, and how are they profiting off of the pain of people?

Now, I spoke to a a elderly man from Albuquerque who had been deported to the camp East Montana in El Paso, and he has a 13 year old American daughter that lives right here in Albuquerque.

And he said, Congressman Vasquez, he says, I haven't gotten as much as a speeding ticket in my life.

I've been in this detention center for four months, and at this point I just want to be deported.

But they are not giving me an opportunity to go before the judge to give me my deportation orders, because I know they want to keep me in this bed, to fill this bed, because every day that he stays, there is another couple of thousand dollars for that private prison corporation.

So this is not the right model to detain people that don't have access to medical care, where there's high rates of suicidal ideation.

Obviously, we're folks are being mistreated and the reports are horrible.

Even the GAO that has interviewed individual detention centers has has outlined some of these significant problems.

That's not who we are as a country.

Now, any violent offender, you know, if you're convicted of rape or murder or assault or any of those things, all those folks deserve to feel the full weight of the law and justice.

Does that have to be at an immigration detention center?

Perhaps.

Can it be at a county jail or another holding facility?

Perhaps those folks, just like -- >> Nash: You█re talking about criminal offenses, not a civil violation.

>> Vasquez: I'm talking about criminal offenses, right.

And so so those folks need a place to be while they go through the legal process.

>> Nash: What can Congress do to fix this?

>> Vasquez: Well, I think we have to end this marriage with the private prison corporations.

You know, since day one of running for Congress in 2022, I said, I will never accept money for private prison corporations because I don't believe that their business model is really in the best interest of the system of justice that we deserve as Americans in this country.

And so we've got to end that model.

I would rather see us go back to the Bureau of Prisons and look at the federal standards for detention for anybody, whether they're American citizens or not.

If they are on our soil, they deserve a standard of care that is worthy of our American values and how we treat people in this country.

That is not happening under the current situation with the detention centers that we have.

I understand that there's jobs at stakes in rural communities when it comes to these detention centers.

I know that's an issue in particular in Cibola County.

However, you know, there are other ways to to help support and develop those counties.

And I know that the state has worked on potentially some deals with those counties to provide that income support.

>> Nash: I mean the prison is is still running, so they don't need it.

>> Vasquez: Well, that's that's exactly right.

I think bottom line is that the inhumane conditions in these detention centers are not worthy of who we are as Americans, and we should not accept that as New Mexicans.

>> Nash: Switching gears a little bit.

You voted against President Trump's big bill, which led to tens of thousands of New Mexicans from losing Snap benefits or food stamps.

You also sit on the House Committee on Agriculture, which oversees the Snap program.

If reelected, what steps will you take to support district two residents who lost their Snap benefits, all while grocery prices are through the roof?

>> Vasquez: Yeah, well, first I've introduced several different bills in Congress to help address both of these issues or have sponsored or co-sponsored these issues.

Bottom line, 10,000 New Mexican kids today don't have access to food from Snap benefits.

That's $6 a day, right?

And I showed my colleagues with $6 a day buys you in your Mexico.

That's a can of pinto beans.

That's a small bag of tortillas.

And that's maybe a can of green chili that that kid has to eat for three meals.

Taking that away is completely cruel for a child, right?

They're doing this under the guise of trying to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse.

What does that kid.

What does that kid done to to be fraudulent, wasteful, or abusive of a system in which he deserves to have food?

It's completely unacceptable.

So we have to restore those snap cuts.

That means that our budget priorities have to change in Congress.

And when House Democrats have the opportunity to lead committees like the Appropriations Committee and the Agriculture Committee, we negotiate the budget.

Whether Senate Republicans or Senate Democrats have control will have even more leverage.

And so restoring those cuts is really important.

And looking at other areas of spending, look, the $1.5 trillion permanent tax cuts to billionaires and reversing that making billionaires, they pay their fair share so that we can restore food to the mouths of young kids who are eager to learn, is a common sense solution for me.

>> Nash: And you're pointing to the possibilities if Democrats retake the House.

What if Congress is split and Republicans maintain their majority in the Senate?

Do you do you anticipate some bipartisan support for this kind of thing?

>> Vasquez: Well, I think there's going to have to be because Republicans won't have the power of reconciliation.

That is how they rammed H.R.

one, the big, ugly bill down the throats of the American people.

That is why we are partly in the economic situation that we faced with health care shortages.

About 90,000 New Mexicans about to lose their health care.

They can no longer do that.

If Democrats control the House, even if Senate, the Senate is Republican controlled.

So they'll have to negotiate with us.

They can't pass these draconian reconciliation bills, which honestly wasn't a product of Congress.

It was a product of this administration.

It was cruelty coming from the top, from the white House all the way to the bottom.

>> Nash: With Republican Congress members not necessarily pushing back.

>> Vasquez: And that is and that is the problem.

Is that all but maybe 1 or 2 Republicans actually stood up against the president's agenda.

And what we've seen is that when MAGA Republicans sign on and get the full support of President Trump to run in a campaign like the one that I'm running in today, and they collect these millions of dollars from the associated PACs and all those billionaires that are benefiting from these tax breaks.

Their loyalty is to the president, not to the people of New Mexico.

>> Nash: Now let's look at another committee assignment you have, which is House Armed Services that oversees military funding.

You have argued that the US is spending too damn much on its war in Iran.

You've also called to end military support for Israel.

What's the right amount to spend on foreign wars, and what can you do in Congress to actually start to rein in some of this spending?

>> Vasquez: Yeah, well, it starts with ending the Iran war.

I voted six times already to end the Iran war.

And we've seen more Republicans now join our effort to end the Iran war.

The president's foreign policy has been completely catastrophic.

Starting this unauthorized war without notice to Congress, without our allies in Iran has one cost American taxpayers.

I mean so much money, both in the cost of gas and diesel and fertilizer.

You add on top of that the legal tariffs that have been ruled unconstitutional.

And it's just ridiculous.

This American foreign policy under this administration has killed hundreds of innocent school children in Iran.

22 American casualties.

And look, the president just made a diesel deal with Russia, an enemy of the United States, giving information to Iran on the location of Americans American service bases.

So we just made a deal with one of our enemies under the president's foreign policy.

And on top of that, we are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on this war.

That is not that the federal government refuses to admit the total cost of this war, because they know that it's incredibly high.

>> Nash: Is any amount spent there too much.

>> Vasquez: I think we need to go back to an approach of diplomacy and economic policy and working with our allies, those relationships that the president has so badly damaged with our European.

And even now, some of our allies in the Gulf have really hurt our ability to solve this in a diplomatic way.

I don't want Iran to have a nuclear weapon, just like any American doesn't.

But the reality is that we are no closer to Iran achieving a nuclear weapon from the start of this war to the than to the end of this.

There is no end to this war, right?

And that's the reality of where we're at on the ground.

>> Nash: What about military aid to Israel.

You have called to end funding given to Israel for its war in Gaza.

What about weapons?

How do you feel about the US supplying Israel with weapons for that?

>> Vasquez: Well, I'm a I'm a co-sponsor of the Block the Bombs Act, and proudly so under Prime Minister Netanyahu, we have seen the atrocities that have been committed in Gaza against those innocent people.

They're against their infrastructure restricting food aid.

I'm honestly the humanitarian disaster that that is over there.

Using taxpayer dollars to support that war, I think is just completely unjust, not reflective of what the American people want to see their tax dollars spent on and.

>> Nash: Do you consider it a ge >> Vasquez: I do, yeah, because too many, far too many innocent civilians have have died at the hands of a regime in Israel.

Currently, the folks that are in charge and and I don't want to categorize every single person in Israel because there are many who disagree with the Prime Minister's position and with this war.

But under this current war and the IDF's stated positions publicly of eliminating the state of Gaza and not wanting to have a two state solution, amounts of the purposeful killing of innocent people for the sake of absolute power.

That, and you couple that with the violence in the West Bank and the encroachment into Palestinian territory, and we're not seeing an attempt at an actual peaceful two state solution.

>> Nash: Now, you mentioned earlier how the war in Iran is impacting costs here at home, beyond working against the war effort and working to end the war, what are you willing to do?

What are you looking to do for district two residents who are struggling to make ends meet and who consider affordability their number one priority?

This election?

>> Vasquez: If you were to look into the homes of many New Mexicans who are middle class, who are trying and struggling to get to the middle class, of what bills they are going to pay that month of, if they can afford to take maybe at least one vacation that year, one camping trip, a Ford Christmas presents, a Ford, a Halloween costume, basic things that any family should be able to have.

Not working two jobs, not working three jobs, but working one job.

It is a devastating economic situation that we find ourselves in, and it's even worse for small businesses that are struggling to survive because the cost of inputs, the cost of goods for their products, they're raising prices on just about everything.

So we've got to end the war in Iran immediately.

We've got to cut these ridiculous tariffs, and we've got to start making friends with our largest trading partners again, which is Canada and Mexico, to bring down the cost of goods rather than putting these arbitrary tariffs that, again, my opponent supports fully.

And it's it's being, you know, felt across every household in New Mexico.

We can reverse it.

And after we end the war it's still going to take some time.

But that is step number one.

>> Nash: You co-founded the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus last year.

Since then, the Trump administration has rescinded or proposed rescinding several protections for these areas the public lands rule, the Roadless Rule, opening these lands to a more development.

If New Mexico sends you back to Congress, how will you work to change those proposals in ways that you have yet been able to, and in ways that your challenger won't?

>> Vasquez: Well, I can tell every viewer today that I will be the strongest champion in fighter for public lands in the House of Representatives, and that's part of the reason I started the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus with Representative Zink, former Interior secretary, because I decided to work across the aisle to go knock on the doors of Republicans before the largest public land selloff was about to happen through that reconciliation bill, and convinced my colleagues that this was a bad idea, a bad idea for Montana, a bad idea for Wyoming, a bad idea for Idaho, a bad idea for New Mexico.

And so we found quickly that this wasn't a red or blue issue.

This was a red, white and blue issue.

This was an American issue.

Public lands in our system of public lands that we enjoy today actually started with Republicans in a large sense of the way it was President Roosevelt that created the US Forest Service system, right?

It was Teddy Roosevelt, not just for the benefit of Americans, but also to protect those crucial watersheds, wildlife habitats.

Look, I'm a hunter and an angler, and so I can appreciate that we have places of refuge for our wildlife, for our, you know, for our elk and deer population, for our pronghorn and everything else.

This administration is openly seeking to make deals with corporations, to open up our public lands, to more mining data centers and extractive industries.

And New Mexicans have overwhelmingly rejected those proposals.

>> Nash: What more can you do in your next term that you haven't been able to yet?

>> Vasquez: Well, there's there's a lot it gets wonky.

Let me tell you things like the Congressional Review Act, as an example, being used to reverse land management plans that then open up our lands for things like copper mining, which we saw in the Boundary Waters, our nation's most visited wilderness area.

Things like opening up the coastal plain of the Arctic Refuge, home to the porcupine caribou heard that feeds native communities.

You know, those places that we should protect, places like Chaco Canyon, sacred sites to New Mexicans and indigenous communities across the district.

And my Keystone bill, which is the M.H.

Salmon Greater Gila Wild and Scenic Act, is crucial.

One of the last free flowing rivers in the southwest is in our district, the Gila River, which is a great source of recreation, home to our nation's first wilderness.

And I will pass that bill out of committee and out of the House when I'm elected next year.

>> Nash: And if you're reelected, what's your first priority?

>> Vasquez: My first priority is lowering costs for New Mexicans.

That that's that's the number one issue.

If folks don't have food to eat, if they can't pay their light bills, if they can't put gas in their car, they can't really worry about too much of anything else of what's happening either globally or with other policy.

And so it's ending this damn war with Iran, restoring the pocket, the power of the purse back to Congress, negotiating a budget and appropriations process that actually works and focuses on the middle class, on working class families and not the rich, is my number one priority when I get back.

>> Nash: Congressman, thank you.

>> Vasquez: Thank you so much.

>> Nash: Thanks to Congressman Gabe Vasquez for making a stop off the campaign trail to talk with us about his reelection bid.

We are going to wrap things up tonight with more of my conversation with Greg Cunningham, Vasquez's Republican challenger.

Earlier in the show, we focused on introducing the political newcomer to you and understanding how his background is informing his congressional run.

Now we dig into the heart of the job he's applying for, federal policy.

First up, ICE and Trump's push to end sanctuary city policies in New Mexico and beyond.

And stay with us till the end for some insight into the first bill Cunningham would put his name on if those of you in CD2 send him to Washington.

>> Nash: Welcome back.

Thanks for sticking with us.

>> Cunningham: I didn't run out of here.

>> Nash: Good.

I'm glad.

Immigration, border security.

These are priority issues for your campaign.

You have emphasized targeting violent criminals, cartel traffickers.

And while that is the Trump administration's stated goal as well.

The majority of people in ICE detention today have no criminal convictions.

And a recent analysis by ProPublica documented that more than 500 cases of ICE agents holding American citizens during Trump's crackdown, with at least a dozen of those being deported American citizens.

Congress has appropriated billions to ICE to border protection during this time.

Do you feel like those agencies are spending it well?

>> Cunningham: Wow.

That is a very long and complex question.

Going back to the no criminal convictions we need to establish, and people need to understand that entering this country illegally is against federal law.

That is title eight, section 1325.

>> Nash: That█s a civil violation right?

Not a criminal violation.

>> Cunningham: Well, yes, but but it is against the law.

And so we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

I can tell you, as a former detective that worked at federal task forces.

Law enforcement's focus is on the criminal element, its people that are in our country that are committing crimes, that are victimizing our citizens.

So to answer your question specifically, I know the DOJ has sued the city of Albuquerque for its sanctuary city policies.

And so, as a congressman, I would absolutely join in that effort to lift and get rid of the sanctuary city policies.

That would be one of my priorities is to protect the people.

>> Nash: Well, we've talked at length about some of your priority issues, public safety, border security, with your background as a police officer.

It makes sense that those are taking up the bulk of your platform.

But as a congressman, you're going to be hit with a whole array of issues that you need to vote on.

What are some of the big ones that you are prepared to legislate on?

>> Cunningham: Well, I think going back to New Mexico and who we are, the oil and gas industry is vital to our existence here.

We know what percentage they provide for our state budget.

And I know right now in talking to our oral and gas people, that regulation and red tape is their biggest enemy right now.

And so as a congressman, I would dig in and start getting rid of those regulations, getting rid of that red tape.

Let's utilize the resource we have here to our citizens benefit.

So that's one place other than law enforcement that I would sink my teeth into pretty quickly.

>> Nash: Okay.

Let's talk a little bit about funding.

New Mexico consistently has the highest rates of residents who are enrolled in Medicaid, enrolled in Snap or food stamps, as they are commonly called.

Last year's so-called Big Beautiful bill included stricter eligibility rules for both of those programs.

It reduced how much the federal government will spend on them over the next decade, and it shifted more of the cost to the states.

Vazquez voted against that spending bill.

If you had been in Congress, how would you have voted?

>> Cunningham: Well, again, let's go back to we're not cutting those programs, right.

My understanding and my research tells me that we're going to increase Medicaid by 47% over the next decade.

That's that's what my research tells me.

>> Nash: Funding is being reduced over what was projected.

What would have been spent on those programs is smaller.

>> Cunningham: Yeah.

So so and again, we're not shrinking it for the people that it's intended for.

It is for the fraud and the abuse and the and the people that are not entitled to that benefit.

And so to actually save that system and to make sure that it's available to people that need it, the most vulnerable people in our society, >> Nash: How do you asses that out as a congressman, how do you figure out who is gaming the system versus who legitimately needs these programs?

What kind of data are you looking for?

>> Cunningham: Well, again, I think one right off the bat and we touched on it earlier, was the immigration issue.

I think, again, America First means to me it's not just a political slogan.

It means American citizens first.

Not only not exclusively, but first.

And so if there are people that are here illegally that are not entitled to that, as a taxpayer, we should not be funding those programs for people that are not entitled to them and taking it away from people that actually are entitled to it, that actually need it.

And I don't think that that's controversial in any way.

>> Nash: You just mentioned you identify as an America First conservative.

What does that mean for your stance on the war in Iran and for funding for Israel's war on Gaza?

>> Cunningham: Again, America First just simply means the government that people elect and that people fund through their tax dollars should, at a very basic level, have their best interests first at heart.

And so that's what that means to me.

>> Nash: And does the war in Iran have America's best interests first?

>> Cunningham: Well, again, I'll go back to my experience.

I was a recon marine in that part of the world.

So I have actually been in combat in that theater of war.

And I will tell you that I am against Iran having a nuclear weapon.

I have seen with my war with Saddam Hussein.

I have seen what happens when power goes unchecked.

We have to intervene.

And so and being one of those people that was in that war.

Look, I'm going to make decisions very carefully because I've been one of those people.

And I know that those men and women that are fighting that war right now and their families, nobody wants this to end more than they do, just like when I was there.

But it has to end correctly.

Iran has to give up its nuclear capability, and they have to open the Strait of Hormuz.

And so that's where we're at with that >> Nash: Now in terms of making decisions carefully.

I mean, Congress really hasn't been able to make decisions about this.

Congress did not authorize the war in Iran.

And since then, the House has voted on two, two non-binding resolutions to limit President Trump's war powers.

Though you support the war.

Should Congress have more oversight over it?

>> Cunningham: Well, I'm going to go back to Congress has not declared war since 2000, since World War two.

And so Congress is not set up to act quickly.

And as a former police officer, I know that situations go bad very quickly and on the world stage, that's the same thing.

And so we need a system where we can react quickly and we can react appropriately to make sure American citizens are safe and the world is safe.

>> Nash: And if President Trump reacted quickly in Iran, should Congress now be able to exercise more oversight, like when you get to Washington, if elected, would you like to be more involved in decision making around how the country proceeds there?

>> Cunningham: We should always evaluate where we're at.

Yes.

So the answer is to to make just a sweeping decision and say, I just alluded to it.

Things change very quickly.

And so we make those decisions based on national security and on world security.

But again, to reevaluate those decisions as you go along and Congress is part of that process.

>> Nash: Affordability is probably one of the biggest issues this election cycle for people across the country.

And here in New Mexico, costs and inflation are continuing to rise under Republican control of both chambers of Congress and the white House.

What needs to happen to address the affordability crisis at this moment?

And why isn't it already happening with this kind of unilateral Republican control?

>> Cunningham: Well, again, I'm going to go back to energy.

And you're right about, you know, we've been campaigning since January, and that is the number one issue.

And, you know, I'm a retired police officer.

I'm a working man.

I understand.

And so it's important to acknowledge what's happening.

There's nothing more frustrating than us live in our lives as American citizens.

And we voice something to be told that's things are fine.

So it's important to say, okay, things are a little expensive right now.

We need to work on that.

I alluded to it earlier again.

Oil and gas.

We have it right here under our feet.

Every product on every shelf on every store got there using diesel fuel.

And we have that capability right here in New Mexico to provide a long term, stable price and market for our people here in New Mexico.

And so we need to acknowledge and we need to grow.

And again, you know, my opponent, Gabe Vasquez, has done everything he can to hurt the oil and gas industry.

He's he's voted against bills that would again the regulation the red tape.

He's he's enabled that.

And so for Democrats now to shut down refineries to provide red tape to do it, to say it out loud, we want to, you know, green New Deal and handicap that industry.

And then now jump up and down and say, oh my gosh, prices are high.

Well no kidding.

>> Nash: Well, but prices are high in large part due to tariffs due to the war in Iran.

>> Cunningham: And energy back to energy.

You're right.

The war.

It's it's about that strait, the Strait of Hormuz.

And is the world's appetite for oil satiated.

And we should not be depending on a country or a straight or anything else on the other side of the world to provide long term stability when we have that ability.

Right.

New Mexico is the number two gas and gas producing state in the country.

Lee County is number one.

We have the capability.

Let's utilize it right.

>> Nash: Representative Vasquez also co-founded the bipartisan Public Lands Caucus last year.

It has a focus on preventing the sale of public lands.

Former Republican congressman who used to represent the job that you are going for, Steve Pearce, he's now the director of BLM, the Bureau of Land Management.

But back when he was the congressman from CD2, he called on the federal government to sell off some of its vast land holdings to help pay down its debt.

How would you react to proposals to sell off or further develop public lands here in New Mexico?

>> Cunningham: Well, again, to comment on why some, you know a congressman or congresswoman did that x number of years ago.

I don't know, but I can tell you again, going back to who I am, New Mexican and growing up hunting in New Mexico and and enjoying public lands, they're not for sale.

They're not for sale.

I mean, that's who we are.

That's one of our foundational things here in New Mexico is our our families, our faith, our land, our culture.

And those public lands are part of who we are.

They're part of our history, part of our culture.

And they're not for sale.

Nash: And what about development oil and gas?

You're saying open up more of the floodgates for more oil and gas.

>> Cunningham: again on a case by case basis?

If if there is a piece of land that.

That I, you know, we think or that studies or anyone shows that would be beneficial to unleash oil and gas to some degree, again, we can address that at that time.

But to sit here and just say yes or no, that's irresponsible.

>> Nash: Okay.

Now if elected, what would be the very first bill that you would introduce in Congress?

>> Cunningham: The National Crime bill.

>> Nash: and what would that do?

>> Cunningham: I would like to look at sentencing guidelines for fentanyl.

I don't think that fentanyl is being sentenced correctly.

Our trend here in New Mexico are overdose.

Deaths are rising, which is in direct contradiction to the rest of the country.

My family recently lost our nephew, 29 year old young man.

I will say his name, Derrick Montoya.

>> Nash: I'm so sorry.

>> Cunningham: So we're not statistics.

We're people and the people that are trafficking in that poison, in that death for our children and our family members need to be held accountable and sentenced accordingly.

Part of that bill, I'd like to create a program where retired police officers are put back in our middle and high schools.

Again, from a public safety standpoint, that's a no brainer.

That greatly reduces the chance of a school shooting, but it also puts our police officers back in touch with the young people in our community, and it creates that bond going forward.

And so the revised version of the 1994 National Crime Bill, which President Clinton championed, I think would be appropriate and it's much needed.

>> Nash: Greg Cunningham Thanks so much for your time.

>> Cunningham: Thank you, I appreciate it.

Big thanks to Greg Cunningham and Representative Gabe Vasquez for those in-depth conversations as they vie for that pivotal seat in Congress.

If you have yet to cast your ballot, a reminder that early voting expands beyond the confines of County clerk's offices to far more locations tomorrow, Saturday, October 17th, and be sure to catch in focus next week when we will keep Congress on our minds with a look at district one.

We'll also introduce you to one of the candidates looking to become New Mexico's first new Secretary of State in a decade.

For New Mexico PBS I'm Nash Jones, until then, stay focused.

Funding for New Mexico in Focus is provided by viewers like you.