>> FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS PROVIDED BY VIEWERS LIKE YOU.

>> Gene: THIS WEEK ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS PRIORITIZING PUBLIC SAFETY.

THE GOVERNOR AND A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF LAWMAKERS SET SOME CLEAR GOALS DURING THE SECOND WEEK OF THE SESSION.

>> THIS IS A CRISIS THAT DIDN'T START YESTERDAY.

IT DIDN'T START FOUR YEARS AGO.

>> IT IS AN ALL-HANDS-ON-DECK APPROACH.

>> Medina: WE HAVE TO GET TOUGH ON CRIME.

>> Gene: AND AN UPDATE ON THE MEXICAN GRAY WOLF CAPTURED AFTER BEING SPOTTED WANDERING IN OUR STATE.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS NOW.

THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS WEEK.

I AM YOUR HOST, GENE GRANT.

GOVERNOR MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM IS LAYING OUT HER PUBLIC SAFETY PRIORITIES FOR LAWMAKERS DURING THE 60-DAY SESSION AND SHE IS NOT ALONE.

COMING UP IN ABOUT 15 MINUTES WE TAKE YOU INSIDE THE ROUNDHOUSE TO HEAR WHY A BIPARTISAN GROUP OF LAWMAKERS IS WORKING TOGETHER ON THIS ISSUE.

AND NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAND SPEAKS TO SENATE MINORITY LEADER GREGORY BACA TO ASK WHY HE THINKS DOING LEGISLATION ISN'T THE ANSWER TO THE STATE'S CRIME PROBLEM.

ANOTHER DEBATE OVER PUBLIC SAFETY IS BEING REIGNITED AT THE STATE CAPITOL AFTER THE SHOOTINGS TARGETING LAWMAKERS.

THE SUSPECT CHARGED WITH ORCHESTRATING THAT SCHEME WILL BE HELD IN JAIL UNTIL TRIAL.

BUT SOME LAWMAKERS ARE QUESTIONING THE PROCESS IT TOOK TO KEEP HIM THERE.

IN ABOUT 25 MINUTES I ASK OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS IF THE STATE'S PRE-TRIAL DETENTION SYSTEM NEEDS AN OVERHAUL.

BUT, WE START WITH ANOTHER TOP STORY HERE IN NEW MEXICO THIS PAST WEEK.

THE ANNOUNCEMENT THAT CRIMINAL AND VOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES WILL BE FILED IN THE DEADLY SHOOTING INCIDENT ON THE FILM "RUST."

LET'S GET TO THE LINE.

WELCOME TO OUR LINE OPINION PANELISTS JOINING ME IN STUDIO THIS WORK.

WE HAVE REBECCA LATHAM, FORMER NEW MEXICO CABINET SECRETARY AND CURRENTLY THE CEO OF GIRL SCOUTS OF NEW MEXICO.

ANDY LYMAN RIGHT THERE TO HER LEFT, REPORTER AT THE SANTA FE REPORTER.

TJ TROUT ACROSS THE TABLE, RADIO HOST FOR KKOB AM AND FM.

GREAT TO HAVE YOU ALL HERE.

NOW, LATE LAST WEEK THE SANTA FE DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE ANNOUNCED IT WOULD BE FILING INVOLUNTARY MANSLAUGHTER CHARGES AGAINST ACTOR ALEC BALDWIN AND THE ARMORER FOR THE FILM "RUST."

THIS IS ALL IN RESPONSE TO THE DEATH OF THE FILMS CINEMATOGRAPHER HALYNA HUTCHINS.

SHE WAS KILLED WHEN A PROP GUN BEING HELD BY MR. BALDWIN WENT OFF AND MR. BALDWIN SAYS HE DID NOT PULL THE TRIGGER BUT EXPERTS SAY THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

AFTER INVESTIGATING THE CASE, THE DA'S OFFICE SAYS THERE WAS CLEAR NEGLIGENCE.

WE WANT TO FOCUS ON THAT WORD, THAT LED TO MS. HUTCHINS' DEATH.

T.J. HOW IMPORTANT IS THIS THAT THE PROSECUTORS SEND A MESSAGE FIRST TO BALDWIN THAT THIS WON'T BE TOLERATED AS WE TRY TO GROW NEW MEXICO'S FILM BUSINESS?

IS THAT AN OVERALL PART OF THIS HERE THAT WE HAVE TO SEND A NOTE TO THE WORLD HERE HOW WE DO OUR THING.

>> Trout: OBVIOUSLY THERE HAS TO BE A NOTE SENT TO THE WORLD.

I WAS TALKING TO UNM LAW PROFESSOR KASTENBERG ABOUT THIS AND I TRUST JUST ABOUT EVERYTHING JOSH SAYS AND HE THOUGHT THIS WAS NOT A SURPRISE.

MY QUESTION IS -- >> Gene: WHICH PART WAS NOT A SURPRISE?

>> Trout: THAT THE INDICTMENT WAS BROUGHT FORTH.

HE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN BUT WHAT ABOUT EVERYTHING ELSE.

THIS IS WHAT KILLS ME.

I CANNOT UNDERSTAND, PARDON THE USE OF THE WORD, WHO BROUGHT THE LIVE AMMO ON TO THE MOVIE SET?

HAVE WE HEARD?

I HAVEN'T HEARD.

WHO PUT THE LIVE AMMO IN THE BOX THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE JUST DUMMIES.

WHO DID THAT?

WHO LOADED THE GUN?

I ASSUME IT WAS HANNAH THAT LOADED THE GUN.

THEN IT WAS DAVID HALLS WHO TOLD BALDWIN, "COLD GUN."

YELLED OUT "COLD GUN."

SO, YOU KNOW, I AM LOOKING AT ALL OF THIS AND I AM GOING, OKAY, ALEC BALDWIN IS AN ACTOR.

ACTORS DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSEDLY SUPPOSED TO DO OR TOLD TO DO.

IF I WERE IN HIS SHOES, AND I WERE BEING TOLD COLD GUN, NO.

1, AND I WAS TOLD THAT THE ARMORER LOADED THIS WITH BLANKS, DUMMY ROUNDS, ARE YOU SUPPOSED TO TRUST THESE TWO PEOPLE LEADING UP TO, IT IS YOUR TURN NOW, SO, OKAY, THESE TWO PEOPLE SAID EVERYTHING IS FINE WITH THIS GUN SO I SHOULD TRUST IT.

>> Gene: REBECCA, GO AHEAD AND PICK UP ON THAT.

I MEAN, THAT IS THE STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE.

YOU HAVE SOMEONE WHO IS HIRED TO DO THESE THINGS AS T.J.

MENTIONED.

TO YELL OUT COLD GUN.

ONE MUST ASSUME AN ACTOR'S HEAD IS ABOUT LINES, SET UP, BEING AN ACTOR.

WHY SHOULD AN ACTOR BE PUT IN A POSITION -- >> Latham: I CAN'T UNDERSTAND THIS AT ALL.

THERE IS NO STANDARD THAT THERE IS AN EXPECTATION THAT ACTORS ALSO BE ARMORERS OR ALSO BACK-UP ARMORERS.

I THINK THERE IS A CONVERSATION ABOUT RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP IN REAL LIFE BUT IN THE MOVIES AND FILM, THERE IS A VERY CLEAR LINE OF WHO DOES WHAT, MUCH LIKE THE MILITARY.

YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.

YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.

YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS.

THERE IS NO PRECEDENT OR STANDARD OR EXPECTATION EVER BEEN PUBLISHED THAT THE ACTOR IS ALSO RESPONSIBLE FOR CHECKING THAT OUT.

SHOULD THE ARMORER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE, IN MY OPINION, SURE.

YEAH, I MEAN, LIKE THAT WAS HER JOB.

SHOULD THE PRODUCER BE HELD RESPONSIBLE, YEAH, BECAUSE YOU ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR HIRING THE PEOPLE TO DO THEIR JOBS.

SHOULD ALEC BALDWIN BE CRIMINALLY CHARGED, I THINK THAT IS A REAL STRETCH.

>> Gene: ANDY, A QUOTE HERE, MR. BALDWIN'S ATTORNEY, "MR. BALDWIN HAD NO REASON TO BELIEVE THERE WAS A LIVE BULLET IN THE GUN OR ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE MOVIE SET.

HE RELIED ON PROFESSIONALS WITH WHOM HE WORKED WHO ASSURED HIM THE GUN DID NOT HAVE LIVE ROUND.

WE WILL FIGHT THESE CHARGES AND WE WILL WIN."

IT IS INTERESTING, YOU KNOW, THE TAKE ON THIS.

ONE OF THEIR MEMBERS.

THEY HAVE TO PROTECT THEM, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING HERE, ANDY, ABOUT PRECEDENCE THAT WORRIES PEOPLE.

IF MR. BALDWIN DOES NOT COME OUT ON THE RIGHT END OF THIS, WHERE DOES THAT PUT ACTORS?

IT IS TROUBLE ON A LOT OF LEVELS.

>> Andy: I THINK ESPECIALLY FOR PRODUCTIONS TO HAPPEN IN NEW MEXICO, YOU STARTED TO TOUCH ON THAT EARLIER, I GUESS, THERE IS PROBABLY LOTS OF PRODUCTION COMPANIES OUT THERE LOOKING AT THIS AND SAYING, WELL, DO WE WANT TO GO BACK AND FILM IN NEW MEXICO.

THERE IS SOME INCENTIVES, OBVIOUSLY, BUT MAYBE NOT IN SANTA FE, RIGHT?

SO, YEAH, I THINK IT DOES SET A PRECEDENT ON A NUMBER OF LEVELS.

BUT, I THINK, NO.

1 IS GOING TO BE HOW MANY MORE PRODUCTIONS SHOW UP HERE TO SHOOT WESTERNS.

>> Trout: I THINK NEW MEXICO FILM AND ALBUQUERQUE FILM ARE WATCHING THIS EXTREMELY CLOSELY.

THEY ARE GOING, THIS IS, OH MY GOD WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.

ARE WE GOING TO LOSE ALL THIS MONEY THAT IS COMING INTO THE STATE.

THE OTHER THING THAT WAS BROUGHT UP, TOO, IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THIS TRIAL MIGHT BE MOVED OUT OF THE COUNTY.

JUST BECAUSE OF THE HUGE AMOUNT OF PRESS THAT IT HAS BEEN GETTING AND PUBLICITY.

I AM THINKING, WELL, MAYBE THEY WANT TO MOVE TO A LESS POPULATED AREA.

>> Gene: INTERESTING HOW THAT WOULD GO.

REBECCA, FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT DA MARY CARMACK-ALTWIES, OF COURSE, SHE ISSUED A STATEMENT WITH THE CHARGES AND THERE HAS BEEN A LITTLE BIT OF PUSHBACK ABOUT HER.

THIS FEELING THAT PERHAPS SHE IS POSITIONING HERSELF FOR A POLITICAL RUN OR THAT SHE IS USING THIS SITUATION TO INCREASE HER NAME RECOGNITION.

I MEAN, SHE IS DOING HER JOB.

SHE CAN'T DO NOTHING.

HOW DO WE LOOK AT HOW SHE IS DOING HER WORK?

>> Latham: WELL, I THINK IT IS RIGHT THAT PEOPLE ARE QUESTIONING THAT.

I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT HER OTHER THAN THIS.

I HAVE NEVER HEARD HER NAME BEFORE SO IT IS KIND OF HARD TO SAY, LIKE, WELL, THIS IS A PATTERN, SHE GOES FOR THESE BIG CASES, BIG NAMES.

BECAUSE AGAIN BEFORE THIS, SHE WAS UNKNOWN, AT LEAST IN MY CIRCLE, BUT I THINK IT IS GOOD FOR US TO QUESTION THAT.

THE LOGIC OF CHARGING ALEC BALDWIN WITH A CRIME IS JUST SO STRANGE TO ME.

THE ONE THING THAT I WILL SAY THAT IS LEAVING A TINY BIT OF DOUBT FOR ME IS WHY WOULD HE SAY HE DIDN'T PULL THE TRIGGER?

LIKE IF HE SAID HE DIDN'T PULL THE TRIGGER BUT HE ACTUALLY DID AND APPARENTLY THE FBI EVEN BACKS UP THAT HE DID.

THERE IS NO WAY THAT THAT GUN FIRED WITHOUT THE TRIGGER BEING PULLED.

WHY WOULD YOU LIE ABOUT THAT, ESPECIALLY IF THERE WAS NO REASON THAT YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN IT WAS LIVE AMMUNITION.

YOU WOULD BE HONEST FROM THE VERY BEGINNING.

MAYBE HE DIDN'T REMEMBER PULLING THE TRIGGER, MAYBE LIKE THERE IS ALL KINDS OF TRICKS THE HUMAN MIND CAN PLAY IN THAT SITUATION, BUT THAT IS THE ONE PART THAT IS LEAVING ME JUST A LITTLE BIT LIKE, WELL, MAYBE HE IS NOT AS INNOCENT AS WE THINK HE IS.

>> Gene: WELL, REMINDER, WITH THAT COLT 45, THE FBI HAS THAT GUN NOW, AND THERE IS A QUESTION TO WHETHER IF YOU JUST PULL THE HAMMER BACK IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WOULD SET THE GUN OFF VERSUS PULLING THE TRIGGER.

I CAN SEE WHERE, YOU KNOW, MR. BALDWIN IS TRYING TO THREAD THE NEEDLE, ANDY LYMAN, BUT I AM NOT SURE THAT IS GOING TO BE EVER FIGURED OUT.

WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT WHAT T.J.

MENTIONED EARLIER.

WE DON'T KNOW AND THE DA HAS SAID SHE IS NOT TERRIBLY CONCERNED HOW THAT LIVE AMMUNITION GOT ON THE SET IN THE FIRST PLACE.

IT SEEMS LIKE WE SHOULD BE BACKING WAY, WAY, WAY UP HERE AND LOOKING AT THE ENTIRE PROTOCOL ABOUT HOW WE DO THOSE THINGS.

SOMETHING JUST DOESN'T FEEL QUITE RIGHT HERE.

>> Andy: ON ONE HAND I WOULD SORT OF EXPECT SOME OF THESE THINGS TO START COMING OUT AS WE SEE THE CHARGES ACTUALLY FILED IN COURT, RIGHT.

THERE IS A WHOLE CRIMINAL PROCESS OR CRIMINAL TRIAL PROCESS AND HEARING PROCESS THAT GOES WITH THIS, RIGHT.

WE NEED TO ACTUALLY SHOW, EITHER THROUGH A GRAND JURY OR A HEARING, THAT THERE IS ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO ACTUALLY MOVE FORWARD WITH A TRIAL ON THIS.

WE ARE IN THE VERY BEGINNING STAGES OF THAT AND THERE IS DISCOVERY AND ALL THOSE THINGS.

THAT MAY COME UP AGAIN, BUT, YEAH, EVERYBODY I HAVE TALKED TO ABOUT THIS SAYS, WELL, WHY IS THERE A BULLET AROUND ANYWAY?

>> Gene: YES.

THE COLT I MENTIONED IS NOW IN THE HANDS OF THE FBI, OF COURSE, AND THE BUREAU CARRIED OUT A SEARCH WARRANT AGAINST THE ALBUQUERQUE AMMUNITION BUSINESS THAT SOLD THE ROUNDS, T.J. THAT IS PDQ ARMS AND PROPS.

NOW IF PROSECUTED, CONSEQUENCES FOR THE COMPANY THAT SOLD THE ROUNDS?

THAT IS A KIND OF A TOUGH THING TO STITCH TOGETHER, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME.

>> Trout: ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE LIVE ROUNDS?

>> Gene: YEAH.

>> Trout: NOT THE DUMMY ROUNDS.

ALL OF THIS HAS TO COME OUT IN DISCOVERY.

THIS IS SO IMPORTANT TO THIS ENTIRE CASE.

FROM THE BEGINNING, WE HAVE GOT TO GET TO THE BEGINNING OF ALL OF THIS.

ANOTHER THING I ALSO THOUGHT OF, WHY IN THE WORLD ARE THEY USING REAL GUNS ON SETS ANYMORE, ANYWAY?

WHY NOT RUBBER GUNS?

WHY NOT WOODEN GUNS?

WITH SPECIAL EFFECTS THESE DAYS, YOU DON'T NEED REAL GUNS ANYMORE.

>> Gene: I SHOULD MENTION, SETH KENNEY IS THE OWNER OF THAT COMPANY.

HE SAYS HE PROVIDED 50 DUMMY ROUNDS.

HE DENIES THAT THE ROUNDS FOUND ONSET AS PART OF THAT INVESTIGATION CAME FROM HIM.

WE HAVE HIS WORD THERE AND THE FBI STILL WORKING THROUGH THIS AND WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

LET'S KIND OF COME BACK TO WHERE WE STARTED HERE WITH ALEC BALDWIN.

IS THERE ANYTHING MR. BALDWIN -- ISN'T THE QUESTION OF ALEC BALDWIN BEING JUST TOO FAMOUS?

YOU KNOW WHAT I AM TRYING TO SAY HERE?

>> Latham: THAT IS, I THINK, IN MY OPINION THAT IS WHAT IT IS LOOKING AT.

LIKE IF THIS WERE -- I THINK THE BIG MISJUSTICE IS THE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC RESOURCES THAT IS GOING TO GO INTO FIGHTING THIS ON BEHALF OF THE CITIZENS OF SANTA FE COUNTY.

BECAUSE WHEN THE DA GETS OUT THERE AND SAYS, LIKE, HE WAS CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT.

NOT JUST CRIMINALLY NEGLIGENT.

HE WAS GUILTY OF A CRIME THAT, YOU KNOW, LIKE HIS ATTORNEYS, HE HAS GOT THE RESOURCES TO FIGHT BACK AND SHE IS NOT GOING -- IF SHE CAN FIND THE EVIDENCE, SHE IS NOT GOING TO -- GOSH, I AM LIKE -- I JUST LOST MY TRAIN OF THOUGHT.

SHE IS NOT STEPPING BACK.

>> Gene: IT IS GOING TO BE INTERESTING.

I AM CURIOUS IF ANY OF THE LOCAL CHANNELS WILL BE CARRYING THE TRIAL LIVE.

THAT WOULD BE FASCINATING TO WATCH.

TO HAVE ALL THAT STUFF COME OUT LIKE ANDY WAS MENTIONING, THAT WOULD BE REALLY INTERESTING.

THANKS TO OUR LINE OPINION PANEL.

WE'LL BE BACK HERE AT THE ROUND TABLE IN JUST ABOUT 10 MINUTES TO DISCUSS THE DEBATE OVER PRETRIAL DETENTION THAT IS REIGNITED IN THE LEGISLATURE.

>> McGee: WOLVES ARE NORTH OF I-40.

THEY ARE ATTACKING LIVESTOCK.

THERE IS NOTHING LANDOWNERS CAN DO ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY ARE FULLY PROTECTED UNDER THE ACT AND THIS WOLF, MOVED NORTH INTO AN AREA AND SETTLED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY LAND.

AND AFTER 14 DAYS, IT WAS PRETTY OBVIOUS IT WASN'T GOING TO MOVE BACK DOWN SOUTH.

AND AT THE REQUEST OF THE LANDOWNERS, WE CAPTURED IT AND IT IS CURRENTLY IN A PEN AT OUR SEVILLETA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

>> Gene: WE ARE ABOUT TWO WEEKS INTO THE 60-DAY LEGISLATIVE SESSION IN SANTA FE AND THERE ARE SOME EARLY SIGNS OF BIPARTISANSHIP.

WEDNESDAY AT THE ROUNDHOUSE A GROUP OF DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS FROM BOTH CHAMBERS GATHERED INSIDE THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE TO ADDRESS THE STATE'S PUBLIC SAFETY PROBLEMS.

GOVERNOR MICHELLE LUJAN GRISHAM LED THE PRESS CONFERENCE BUT SHE WASN'T THE ONLY ONE PUTTING IDEAS ON THE TABLE.

>> Governor: AS AN ELECTED LEADER, AS A PARENT, AS A LONG-TIME NATIVE NEW MEXICAN, I AM HURT PERSONALLY, INTELLECTUALLY, AND EMOTIONALLY ABOUT WHAT IS OCCURRING AROUND THE WORLD, IN OUR COUNTRY AND MORE SPECIFICALLY WHAT IS HAPPENING IN MY BACKYARD.

NO NEW MEXICAN, NO MOTHER OR FATHER, NO GRANDPARENT SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT WHAT THE DAY LOOKS LIKE WHEN THEIR CHILD GOES TO SCHOOL.

NOBODY SHOULD BE FEARFUL ABOUT GOING TO THEIR WORKPLACE.

WE STARTED OUR WORKPLACE A LITTLE BIT LATE THIS MORNING.

THERE WAS YET ANOTHER BREAK-IN TO ONE OF OUR STATE BUILDINGS.

EVERYDAY, EVERYWHERE, SOMEBODY IS EXPERIENCING A PUBLIC SAFETY OR CRIME ISSUE, IN EVERY SINGLE CORNER OF OUR STATE.

NOT ONLY IS IT UNTENABLE, IT IS UNACCEPTABLE AND WE ARE ALL NOW TAKING THAT NOT ONLY FROM A POLICY PERSPECTIVE, THERE ISN'T ANYBODY IN THIS ROOM THAT DOESN'T TAKE THAT PERSONALLY.

>> Medina: I AM NOT JUST HERE TO REPRESENT THE CITY OF ALBUQUERQUE.

I WAS BORN AND RAISED IN MEXICO.

AND WHAT I LEARNED WEEKS AGO WHEN I VISITED MY HOME TOWN AND SPOKE TO MY RELATIVES WHO ARE FIRST RESPONDERS AND I SAW WHAT STRUGGLES THEY ARE GOING THROUGH WITH DRUGS, WITH VIOLENCE, AND IT IS WHAT IS GOING ON IN ALBUQUERQUE.

I COMMEND THE GOVERNOR FOR ACKNOWLEDGING THAT.

THIS IS A PROBLEM THAT IS CONCERNING FOR ALL OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO AND EVERY PERSON WHO LIVES HERE.

AS CHIEF OF POLICE OF THE LARGEST AGENCY IN THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO I AM HERE TO FIRST SAY THAT I DON'T NEED EVERY SINGLE PERSON TO STAY IN JAIL.

I HAVE SAID IT BEFORE, I HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO ARE DRUG ADDICTS.

THEY NEED HELP.

THEY NEED RESOURCES TO GET OFF OF THEIR ADDICTION.

I HAVE FAMILY MEMBERS WHO HAVE MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES.

THEY NEED MENTAL HEALTH RESOURCES AND THEY NEED HELP IN THE AREAS OF MENTAL HEALTH.

I HAVE A SISTER WHO WORKS AT WAL-MART AND I WORRY EVERYDAY THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL THAT SOMEBODY COMMITTING RETAIL THEFT IS GOING TO POINT A GUN AT HER TRYING TO STEAL $50 WORTH OF PRODUCT.

WE HAVE TO GET TOUGH ON CRIME.

>> Martinez: THIS IS A CRISIS THAT DIDN'T START YESTERDAY.

IT DIDN'T START FOUR YEARS AGO.

IT WAS MANY YEARS IN THE MAKING AND I AGREE WITH YOU GOVERNOR, THERE IS A DEEP BENCH OF LEADERS IN THIS ROOM AND EVEN OUTSIDE THIS ROOM WHO ARE WILLING AND READY TO GET TO WORK TO BEGIN THE PROCESS OF UNDOING A LOT OF THE BAD THINGS THAT LED US TO THIS CRISIS.

>> Lane: IF YOU ASK, I THINK, EVERYDAY NEW MEXICANS, CRIME IS AT THE TOP -- IF IT IS NOT AT THE TOP OF THE LIST, IT IS VERY NEAR IT.

IT IS IN THE FOREFRONT OF EVERY NEW MEXICAN'S MIND.

SO FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, IT IS AN ALL-HANDS-ON-DECK APPROACH, RIGHT.

THIS IS ONE AREA WHERE I THINK WE NEED TO BE SERIOUS WHEN WE SAY THAT WE PUT POLITICS ASIDE AND LET'S EVALUATE EACH IDEA, EACH PROPOSAL.

IF IT IS A GOOD IDEA THAT FIXES A PROBLEM, LET'S GET IT DONE.

I KNOW THAT IS GOING TO BE MY CAUCUS' APPROACH AGAIN AND I APPRECIATE THE GOVERNOR'S REMARKS WHEN SHE USED THE WORD DISCOURSE AND DEBATE.

YOU DON'T WANT AN ECHO CHAMBER.

IT IS NOT GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE OF NEW MEXICO.

SO WE WANT LEGISLATION TO BE REFINED AS IT GOES THROUGH AND I KNOW WE ARE GOING TO BE PART OF THAT PROCESS AS WELL.

>> Martinez: AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A CRISIS THAT STARTED OVERNIGHT.

MANY OF US REMEMBER THE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH SYSTEM BEING DECIMATED 10 YEARS OR SO AGO AND HOW THAT LED IN MANY WAYS TO THE SITUATION WE HAVE HERE TODAY.

THAT IS WHY THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE AND THIS GOVERNOR WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE INVESTMENT IN CRITICAL PROGRAMS LIKE BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, HOUSING.

THOSE OF YOU IN ALBUQUERQUE KNOW HOW CRITICAL HOUSING IS.

TREATMENT PROGRAMS.

HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE HAD A LOVED ONE OR A FRIEND WHO IS IN NEED OF DETOX OR TREATMENT AND IT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE SOMETIMES TO FIND SERVICES.

AS WELL AS SUPPORTING OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES STARTING WITH OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT, ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE DA, COURTS, AND PUBLIC DEFENDERS AND EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE JUDICIARY.

>> Governor: NOT EVERY SINGLE PERSON IN THIS ROOM AGREES WITH EVERY SINGLE EFFORT BY ANY NUMBER OF THESE BILLS.

TYPICALLY, WHEN WE ALL COME TOGETHER, THAT IS WHAT WE'RE NOT TRYING TO PRESENT.

WE ARE TRYING TO SHOW THAT WE ARE ALL TOGETHER, WE HAVE A PLAN.

THE DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP, I'LL BE A LITTLE PARTISAN HERE, WE GOT IT, WE GOT THE VOTES, WE ARE GOING.

WE ARE BUILDING A PUBLIC SAFETY INVESTMENT STRATEGY FOR THE SHORT TERM AND THE LONG TERM IN THE STATE.

THAT IS GOING TO TAKE EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US, EVERY SINGLE DAY IN A NUMBER OF WAYS AND WE ARE GOING TO WORK COLLECTIVELY TO GET AS MANY OF THE BEST IDEAS UP HERE AS POSSIBLE.

>> Lane: AS FAR AS THINGS THAT REPUBLICANS ARE WORKING ON THAT I THINK WILL HELP COMBAT OUR CAREER CRIMINALS THAT I KNOW WE CAN WORK WITH WITH OUR DEMOCRAT COLLEAGUES, YOU KNOW, THERE IS A FEW THAT COME TO MIND.

ONE, WE HAVE GOT TO STOP FELONS BEING ABLE TO ACQUIRE FIREARMS.

IT IS NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE.

IF YOU'RE A FELON, THERE IS NO WAY YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET AHOLD OF A FIREARM.

>> Medina: THIS IS A MATTER OF GETTING TOUGH ON THE RIGHT PEOPLE.

AND PEOPLE WHO PROVIDE FIREARMS TO CRIMINALS SHOULD FACE CONSEQUENCES.

EVERYBODY HERE IS ON THE SAME PAGE.

PEOPLE WHO SHOULD NOT HAVE FIREARMS SHOULD NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

WE ARE HERE TO BE TOUGH ON CRIME, KEEP PEOPLE IN JAIL AND MAKE ALBUQUERQUE AND THE REST OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO SAFE FOR EVERYONE.

>> Governor: OUR FIRST RESPONDERS AND OUR POLICE OFFICERS ARE NOT SAFE IN THIS CLIMATE, STRAIGHT UP.

YET WE ARE ASKING THEM TO DO MORE WITH LESS IN MANY CONTEXTS AROUND THE STATE.

I SAY THAT WHILE ALSO SAYING AT THE SAME TIME, THIS LEGISLATURE BY FAR THAN ANY OTHER STATE IN THE COUNTRY, HAS DONE MORE ABOUT INVESTING IN A PUBLIC SAFETY INFRASTRUCTURE.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE PER CAPITA NUMBERS, THERE IS NO COMPARISON ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY.

THAT IS ALSO A BIPARTISAN ISSUE THAT SOMETIMES GETS LOST AND IF WE ARE MAKING ALL THOSE INVESTMENTS AND IT STILL DOESN'T GET BETTER, WE MUST DO MORE.

>> Romero: IT IS TRAGIC THAT MASS SHOOTINGS HAVE BECOME AN EVERYDAY EVENT IN AMERICAN LIFE BUT WE FINALLY HAVE THE POWER TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS IN NEW MEXICO.

SAVING LIVES SHOULD BE SOMETHING WE CAN ALL AGREE ON.

INCLUDING A 14-DAY WAITING PERIOD BEFORE ACCESS TO FIREARMS, TO CLOSE A LOOPHOLE ON THOSE ABUSING THE BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM, ESPECIALLY DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENDERS.

I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL JOIN REPRESENTATIVE SERRATO AND OTHERS AND ME IN TAKING THIS BOLD AND COMMONSENSE STEP STATEWIDE BY BANNING THE SALE OF ASSAULT WEAPONS IN NEW MEXICO AND EXTENDING THIS ACCESS PERIOD FOR THOSE ABUSING THE SYSTEM THAT EXISTS.

>> Governor: WE HAVE HAD MASS SHOOTINGS IN THIS STATE.

WE READILY FORGET ABOUT THEM.

WE SHOULD NOT.

AND THE NOTION THAT THOSE RISKS AREN'T REAL HERE IS FLAT WRONG.

AND THE FACT THAT YOU CAN CONVERT A FIREARM, THAT THEY ARE READILY AVAILABLE, AND THAT WEAPONS OF WAR HAVE NO PLACE IN THE DAY-TO-DAY WORK OF OUR SOCIETY IS AN ISSUE WE HAVE TO DEBATE VIGOROUSLY AND FIGURE OUT A PATH FORWARD.

THIS MAY BE THE MOST ROBUST GROUP OF LEADERS, EVER, THINKING ABOUT WAYS TO TACKLE THIS ISSUE.

BY MAKING IT NOT ABOUT CRIME BUT ABOUT A PUBLIC SAFETY ENVIRONMENT THAT WINS THE DAY, THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE IN EVERY ASPECT OF OUR SOCIETY AND FOR EVERY OPPORTUNITY.

>> Gene: SHORTLY BEFORE THAT PRESS CONFERENCE INSIDE THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE, NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT GWYNETH DOLAND CAUGHT UP WITH THE REPUBLICAN LEADER IN THE SENATE, GREG BACA.

HE SAYS NEW LEGISLATION ISN'T THE ANSWER HERE.

>> Gwyneth: SENATOR BACA, THE DEMOCRATS THIS WEEK ARE PUSHING A SUITE OF GUN PROPOSALS THEY SAY WILL HELP REDUCE VIOLENT CRIME.

HOW WOULD YOU APPROACH THE CRIME PROBLEM NEW MEXICANS ARE EXPERIENCING RIGHT NOW?

>> Baca: YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LAWS ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW THAT JUST AREN'T BEING ENFORCED.

I THINK WE GO BACK TO THE EXISTING LAW.

WE ENFORCE THOSE ON THE BOOKS AND I THINK THAT IS OUR SAFEST BET RIGHT NOW.

I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS, IT IS INTERESTING THAT YOU CHOSE THIS LOCATION FOR THIS INTERVIEW, BUT WE ARE SURROUNDED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

IN THAT CONSTITUTION, IT OUTLINES THE GUN PROVISIONS AND OUR LAWFUL RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS.

I THINK I HAVE SOME SERIOUS, AND I BELIEVE MANY MEMBERS, HAVE SOME SERIOUS CONCERNS WITH THE BILLS COMING FORWARD AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE CONSTITUTIONAL AND CAN MOVE PAST THAT SCRUTINY AND I JUST HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS ABOUT THAT RIGHT NOW.

>> Gwyneth: NOW, VIOLENT CRIME IS ONE ISSUE BUT, YOU KNOW, PART OF THEIR ARGUMENT IS THAT THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SAYS WE HAVE AN 81% HIGHER RATE OF KIDS KILLED BY GUNS HERE IN NEW MEXICO.

HOW ARE WE SUPPOSED TO RESPOND TO THAT PROBLEM?

>> Baca: YOU KNOW, OFTEN WE HEAR THESE TYPES OF ARGUMENTS.

TUGGING AT THE HEART STRINGS, FOCUSING ON ONE AREA.

WE ARE ALL FOR CHILD SAFETY.

AND I THINK EVERYBODY CAN GET BEHIND THAT.

THERE IS ALWAYS A BALANCE IN PUBLIC POLICY, THOUGH, WHETHER OR NOT, YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO ENACT LAWS THAT SEVERELY RESTRICT PEOPLE OR ARE WE GOING TO KEEP PEOPLE SAFE.

I THINK WE HAVE THAT BALANCE NOW.

THE LAST THING THAT WE WANT TO DO IS GO AFTER LAW BIDING CITIZENS AND MAKE THEM FELONS OR CRIMINALS BY ENACTING A STATUTE THAT FRANKLY IS JUST UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

>> Gwyneth: WE HAVE SEEN AN UNFORTUNATE UPTICK IN MASS SHOOTINGS, JUST IN THE PAST WEEK.

WE HAVE BEEN VERY FORTUNATE HERE IN NEW MEXICO TO NOT HAVE THESE ISSUES HERE RECENTLY BUT IS THERE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO TO PREVENT THE KIND OF THINGS THAT WE ARE SEEING IN CALIFORNIA RIGHT NOW?

>> Baca: THOSE ARE REALLY DEEP SOCIETAL ISSUES THAT I THINK WE NEED TO GET INTO, THINGS LIKE REINFORCING THE NUCLEAR FAMILY AND EDUCATION AND THOSE TYPES OF THINGS.

WHAT WE HAVE IS ANSWERS THAT REALLY JUST RESTRICT LAW BIDING CITIZENS.

IF I AM A FELON OUT ON THE STREET AND I HAVE A CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO THAT FRANKLY I JUST LAUGH AT BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO LET ME OUT OF JAIL, I AM NOT GOING TO OBEY THOSE ANYWAY.

I AM GOING TO KEEP MY GUN, ANYWAY, AND GUESS WHO IS GOING TO TURN IN ALL THEIR GUNS AND RESTRICT THEIR MAGAZINES AND ABIDE BY THE LAW?

THE REGULAR CITIZEN.

YOU AND I AND THE PUBLIC AT LARGE.

WE ARE GOING TO BE THE PEOPLE THAT OBEY THOSE LAWS.

FELONS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS.

CRIMINALS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE ABOUT THEIR BUSINESS AND THAT IS WHAT MAKES THESE TYPES OF LAWS INEFFECTUAL.

>> Gwyneth: WE HAVE HAD SOME HIGH PROFILE SHOOTINGS RECENTLY THAT INVOLVED GUNS BOUGHT ILLEGALLY.

IS THERE ANYTHING MORE WE CAN DO TO GET THESE ILLEGAL GUNS, NOT THE RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERS, BUT THESE ILLEGAL GUNS OFF THE STREET?

>> Baca: SEE, I THINK YOU'RE REFERRING TO LAWS ON THE BOOKS AGAIN.

AND LAWS ON THE BOOKS, AND UNLIKE THE LAWS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT NOW, THOSE IMPACTING CRIMINALS AND FELONS.

THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE THOSE WEAPONS ANYWAY.

AND IF THEY ARE STOLEN, WELL, THEN THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF A SEPARATE LAW BY HAVING STOLEN PROPERTY.

SO THAT IS WHAT WE NEED TO GO AFTER THERE.

WE NEED TO GO AFTER THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS RATHER THAN EVERYDAY FOLKS MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS, ENJOYING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT THAT IS OUTLINED IN OUR CONSTITUTION HERE IN NEW MEXICO AS HUNTING, FISHING, DEFENSE -- I MEAN, HUNTING, DEFENSE AND ANY LAWFUL PURPOSE.

THAT IS WHAT IT SAYS, YOU KNOW, AS LONG AS YOU ARE CARRYING ON ABOUT YOUR BUSINESS LAWFULLY, YOU SHOULD BE UNBOTHERED.

>> Gene: YOU CAN WATCH ALL OF OUR COVERAGE FROM THE ROUNDHOUSE ON THE NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS YOUTUBE PAGE.

THAT INCLUDES GWYNETH'S CONVERSATION WITH STATE REPRESENTATIVE PAMELA HERNDON ABOUT HER BILL THAT WOULD REQUIRE PARENTS TO SAFELY SECURE GUNS IN A HOME WITH CHILDREN.

NOW, FOR NOW, WELCOME BACK TO THE LINE OPINION PANELISTS.

SHIFTING OUR ATTENTION TO THE LEGISLATURE NOW AFTER THE GOVERNOR ANNOUNCED HER PUBLIC SAFETY PRIORITIES FOR THE SESSION.

NOW THE GOVERNOR BOUGHT UP THE STATE'S PRE-TRIAL DETENTION PROCESS.

IT HAS BEEN DEBATED FOR MORE THAN A YEAR NOW BUT THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ANY CONSENSUS ON HOW TO MOVE FORWARD.

THE HIGH PROFILE SHOOTING SCHEME TARGETING LAWMAKERS TOOK THE CONVERSATION BACK INTO THE HEADLINES THIS WEEK AFTER A JUDGE DECIDED TO HOLD THAT SUSPECT IN THAT CASE IN CUSTODY UNTIL TRIAL.

STATE SENATOR, JOSEPH CERVANTES, I SHOULD ADD, FROM LAS CRUCES, SAYS THAT JUDGES ALREADY HAVE THE DISCRETION THEY NEED TO HOLD DEFENDANTS IN JAIL WHEN IT IS APPROPRIATE AS THEY AWAIT TRIAL BROADLY.

DO YOU AGREE WITH THE SENATOR, ANDY?

HE AS A BIT OF A POINT HERE.

THERE IS A REASON PEOPLE ARE PUSHING FOR THIS.

WHERE IS THE MIDDLE GROUND HERE?

>> Andy: I THINK HE BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT ABOUT THE ARNOLD TOOL WHICH IS NOT MERELY DESIGNED TO SAY SHOULD OR SHOULDN'T THEY -- >> Gene: EXPLAIN THE ARNOLD TOOL.

>> Andy: SO, YEAH, IT IS A TOOL THE SUPREME -- STATE SUPREME COURT CAME UP WITH TO STATE WHEN WE DID THIS BAIL REFORM, A BIG CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT, AND THEY ADDED THIS TOOL TO GAUGE JUST SORT OF HOW DANGEROUS THIS PERSON IS, RIGHT?

HOW MUCH SUPERVISION THEY SHOULD HAVE.

BUT THE ULTIMATE DECISION IS ALWAYS UP TO THE JUDGE.

THERE IS NOTHING THAT SAYS THEY HAVE TO -- AND LOOK AT THE SOLOMON PENA CASE, YOU KNOW, IT DIDN'T SAY THIS GUY SHOULD BE RELEASED.

IT SAID, IF HE IS RELEASED, THIS IS THE LEVEL OF SUPERVISION HE SHOULD HAVE.

>> Gene: REBECCA, SENATOR CERVANTES, AS I MENTIONED, VOCALLY OPPOSED TO ONE SPECIFIC IDEA, LEGISLATION THAT WOULD CREATE A REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION OF DANGEROUSNESS FOR DEFENDANTS CHARGED WITH CERTAIN VIOLENT CRIMES.

THAT MEANS DEFENDANTS WOULD HAVE TO PROVE THEY AREN'T A DANGER IN ORDER TO BE RELEASED AHEAD OF TRIAL.

ANY DANGERS IN YOUR GUT ABOUT THAT PHILOSOPHY THAT JUMPS TO THE SURFACE?

>> Latham: ABOUT HIM NOT WANTING TO ENTERTAIN THE IDEA OF REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION AGAIN?

I THINK, I MEAN, TO GO BACK TO THE ARNOLD TOOL, I THINK IT IS DEEPLY FLAWED.

I THINK THE INTENT TO HAVE IT WAS GOOD.

I APPRECIATE SENATOR CERVANTES' ACKNOWLEDGING THAT IT HAS MANY FAULTS.

I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW UNTIL THE SOLOMON PENA CASE THAT JUDGES DID HAVE THE ABILITY.

I THOUGHT IT WAS LIKE, OKAY, YOU PLUG THESE NUMBERS IN, BEEP, BEEP, BEEP, LIKE IT IS GOING TO TELL YOU LIKE PUT IN JAIL OR LET YOU BACK OUT.

PERSONALLY, I AM STILL A BIG FAN OF, IF YOU'RE IN JAIL IN THE FIRST PLACE, IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVE THAT YOU ARE NOT A FLIGHT RISK, YOU'RE NOT A DANGER TO SOCIETY.

I KNOW THAT IS NOT FAIR IN EVERY CASE BUT IN ALBUQUERQUE AND IN NEW MEXICO WHEN EVEN THE GOVERNOR AND THE LEADERS OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ARE SAYING, CRIME IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING ON EVERYBODY'S MIND, I THINK WE HAVE TO STEP BACK, GET OFF THE SOAPBOX WE WERE ON LAST SESSION, LIKE, NO, WE ARE NOT GOING TO ENTERTAIN REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION, LIKE, DO IT.

GET IT DONE FOR THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE WE ARE SICK AND TIRED OF BEING VICTIMS.

>> Gene: PICK UP ON THAT.

PEOPLE WANT SOMETHING DONE ABOUT CRIME HERE.

>> Trout: ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT SHOULD BE PART OF THE ARNOLD TOOL, BY THE WAY, I THINK THEY SHOULD CHANGE THE NAME OF THAT, BUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I THINK SHOULD BE, YOUR ABILITY TO USE A SAW TO SAW YOUR ANKLE MONITOR OFF.

WHAT IS THE PROPENSITY OF YOU GOING TO BE DOING THAT WHEN YOU GET OUT.

LOOK, THEY CALL JUDGES, JUDGES FOR A REASON.

THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE SMART.

THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO MAKE CONSCIOUS, RATIONAL DECISIONS ON WHAT TO DO WITH OUR ACCUSED CRIMINALS AND OUR CRIMINALS.

SO, THEY SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

THE ARNOLD TOOL IS A TOOL.

THAT IS ALL IT IS.

IT IS NOT THE END ALL OF HOW THE DECISION SHOULD BE MADE.

I AGREE WITH REBECCA, I THINK IT IS SERIOUSLY FLAWED BECAUSE I WAS THINKING, JUST, FOR INSTANCE, SAY SOMEBODY HAS BEEN A BOY SCOUT THEIR ENTIRE LIFE OR GIRL SCOUT THEIR ENTIRE LIFE.

THEY HAVE GIVEN TO CHARITY AND ARE AN UPSTANDING CITIZEN, PARTICIPATED IN THE COMMUNITY AND THEN ONE DAY THEY SNAP, PICK UP AN AR AND THEY GO SHOOT UP A BIG BOX STORE.

>> Latham: NOT A GIRL SCOUT.

>> Trout: A GIRL SCOUT WOULD NEVER DO THAT, RIGHT.

WHAT I AM SAYING IS, NONE OF THAT MIGHT REGISTER ON THE ARNOLD TOOL BECAUSE THIS PERSON HAS A PURE AS THE DRIVEN SNOW HISTORY, BUT IT DIDN'T SHOW UP.

I THINK THAT IS WHY IT IS FLAWED.

I MAY BE MISCONSTRUING ARNOLD HERE.

>> Latham: AS I UNDERSTAND IT AS EXPLAINED TO ME BY RAUL TORREZ, NOT TO ME PERSONALLY, I WAS LISTENING TO HIM SPEAK, ONE OF THE BIG INDICATORS, IF YOU HAVE BEEN CONVICTED OF A GUN CRIME, THEN IT IS THREE POINTS.

IF YOU WERE NEVER CONVICTED BECAUSE YOUR CASE NEVER WENT TO TRIAL BECAUSE THE PROSECUTOR NEVER GOT THEIR POOP IN A GROUP TO GET YOU TO TRIAL, EVEN IF YOU HAVE NEVER BEEN CONVICTED, THEREFORE YOU GET A ZERO ON THE DANGER SCALE.

IT IS ABOUT THE CONVICTION PART.

THIS IS HOW I UNDERSTAND IT.

IT IS THE LOGIC THAT IT IS FLAWED.

>> Gene: YES.

ANDY, A RELATED IDEA ABOUT REFORM, BAIL REFORM.

SENATE MAJORITY LEADER PETER WIRTH, ONE OF SEVERAL DEMOCRATS OPPOSED TO MAJOR BAIL REFORM CHANGES.

WITHOUT THEIR SUPPORT, DOES THE GOVERNOR HAVE A CHANCE HERE?

SHE REALLY HAS LAID OUT A LOT OF CHANGES SHE WANTS TO SEE.

>> Andy: IT IS GOING TO BE TOUGH.

THERE IS A LOT -- A GOOD NUMBER OF LAWMAKERS THAT KIND OF ARE GOING OFF OF BASICALLY THE CONSTITUTION SAYING, IT IS UP TO THE PROSECUTORS OF THE STATE TO PROVE THE DANGEROUSNESS.

IT SHOULDN'T NECESSARILY -- I MEAN BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION IT IS NOT UP TO THE DEFENDANT TO PROVE THEY DIDN'T DO IT, IT IS THE STATE'S JOB TO PROVE THEY DID.

THIS QUOTE I AM GOING TO BUTCHER IT, BUT IT HAS BEEN REPEATED OVER AND OVER, YOU CAN ATTRIBUTE IT TO LOTS OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

BUT THE IDEA IT IS BETTER TO LET A GUILTY PERSON GO THAN LOCK UP AN INNOCENT PERSON.

I THINK IT IS BASED ON THE CONSTITUTION AND I THINK THERE IS A LOT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE LAWYERS IN THE LEGISLATURE AS WELL AS PEOPLE THAT JUST HAVE THAT MIND THAT THEY ARE REALLY GOING TO SORT OF QUESTION THAT.

PETER WIRTH TOLD ME SPECIFICALLY WHEN I INTERVIEWED HIM THAT HE SAID, YOU KNOW, ON A NUMBER OF THINGS, NEVER SAY NEVER, BUT HE HAS REALLY GOT TO LOOK AT THIS AND DO A HARD LOOK AT THIS AND SO, YEAH, I THINK IT IS GOING TO BE HARD FOR THE GOVERNOR.

>> Gene: I APPRECIATE THE AMOUNT OF DETAIL THERE BECAUSE FOR T.J., QUOTE FROM SENATOR WIRTH, RIGHT HERE, "THERE IS A NUMBER OF THINGS ON THE CRIME FRONT WE NEED TO DO.

I DON'T SUPPORT ADDING NEW PRESUMPTIONS THAT I THINK WOULD RESULT IN THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE BEING HELD THAT DON'T NEED TO BE HELD."

IS THAT A REASONABLE FEAR FROM THE SENATOR?

>> Trout: SURE.

IT IS ALSO REASONABLE FEAR THAT A LOT OF US LIVE OUR LIVES IN DANGER WALKING DOWN CENTRAL AVENUE DOWNTOWN AT NIGHT.

THAT IS WHY WE HAVE TO REACH A HAPPY MEDIUM HERE.

I AM GOING TO SAY ONE MORE THING ABOUT THE ARNOLD TOOL.

I HAVE TALKED TO CURRENT SERVING JUDGES AND RETIRED JUDGES ABOUT THIS.

AND BOTH OF THEM HAVE SAID, YOU CAN'T RELY SOLELY ON THE ARNOLD TOOL AND IF YOU'RE, AS A JUDGE, RELYING SOLELY ON THE ARNOLD TOOL TO MAKE YOUR DECISIONS, YOU'RE BEING EXTREMELY LAZY.

THIS IS NOT ME.

THIS IS JUDGES SAYING THIS.

>> Gene: YOU KNOW, ARE WE GOING TO GET ANOTHER LOOK AT THE ARNOLD TOOL DURING THIS SESSION?

THESE HIGH PROFILE CASES UNLEASH THINGS LIKE THIS AND WE GET A HARDER LOOK.

>> Latham: BUT FOR SENATOR WIRTH TO SAY THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE, I MEAN, IS THAT ACCURATE?

IS NEW MEXICO SO DANGEROUS NOW THAT WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE HELD WHEN THEY SHOULDN'T BE.

I MEAN, I THINK WE HAVE -- WITHOUT A DOUBT WE HAVE SEEN HOMICIDES AS A RESULT OF SOMEONE WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN BEING HELD UNTIL THEIR HEARING.

THEY WERE LET OUT BECAUSE THE JUDGE DEFERRED TO THE ARNOLD TOOL.

AND THEN IN THAT CASE, THEY COMMIT A VERY DANGEROUS CRIME KILLING SOMEONE.

SO, YOU KNOW, LIKE, I GET IT IS BETTER TO RELEASE A GUILTY PARTY THAN TO HOLD AN INNOCENT ONE, BUT WHAT ABOUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE THEN HARMED.

I DON'T ENVY THEM.

I HAVE MY OPINIONS BUT I DON'T ENVY THEM.

>> Gene: ANDY, LET'S FINISH UP WITH YOU ON THIS.

HOW ABOUT THE BILLS CREATING REBUTTABLE PRESUMPTION FAILED IN THE LEGISLATURE LAST YEAR.

I AM CURIOUS WHY THE DYNAMICS ARE DIFFERENT TO GIVE IT A BETTER CHANCE THIS YEAR.

I AM NOT QUITE SEEING IT.

>> Andy: I AM NOT QUITE SURE EITHER.

WELL, ON THE OTHER HAND, LEGISLATION THAT PASSES MORE OFTEN THAN NOT HAS BEEN THROUGH NUMEROUS TIMES, RIGHT?

THERE IS A PHILOSOPHICAL IDEA OF LAWS OR BILLS IS THAT IT IS NOT GOING TO BE THE BEST IF YOU PASS IT RIGHT AWAY.

SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO SORT OF PRESENT IT TO THE LAWMAKERS OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND MAYBE MAKE SOME TWEAKS EVERY YEAR.

WE SAW THE SAME THING WITH CANNABIS LEGALIZATION.

IT CHANGED SO MANY TIMES, BY THE TIME WE FINALLY GOT IT BECAUSE IT JUST TAKES A LONG TIME FOR PEOPLE TO SORT OF COME ON BOARD.

>> Gene: THAT IS THE PERSPECTIVE WE ARE LOOKING FOR.

GOOD STUFF RIGHT.

THANKS AGAIN TO OUR PANELISTS.

WE WILL BE BACK FOR ONE FINAL DISCUSSION IN ABOUT 10 MINUTES TO TALK ABOUT TERM LIMITS AND IF LAWMAKERS SHOULD CONSIDER THEM AS THEY DEBATE CHANGES TO MODERNIZE THE WAY OUR LEGISLATURE FUNCTIONS.

BUT FIRST AN UPDATE TO THE MEXICAN GRAY WOLF SEEN WANDERING NEW MEXICO.

YOU MIGHT HAVE READ ABOUT THIS.

IN DECEMBER THE YOUNG FEMALE LEFT HER PACK IN SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA AND TRAVELED THROUGH NEW MEXICO CROSSING I-25 AND I-40 MULTIPLE TIMES, THIS IS AMAZING, AS SHE HEADED NORTH LOOKING FOR A MATE.

OUR LAND'S LAURA PASKUS HAS BEEN WATCHING THE WOLF'S PROGRESS THE PAST FEW WEEKS AND SPOKE WITH THE U.S.

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICES MEXICAN WOLF RECOVERY COORDINATOR, BRADY MCGEE, MONDAY MORNING.

WHEN HE TOLD HER THE WOLF HAD BEEN CAPTURED OVER THE WEEKEND.

LAURA ASKS WHY THE WOLF WAS CAPTURED AND WHAT MIGHT HAPPEN NEXT.

>> Laura: BRADY MCGEE, THANKS FOR JOINING ME TODAY.

I APPRECIATE IT.

>> McGee: I APPRECIATE BEING HERE, THANK YOU.

>> Laura: SO, WE WERE TALKING MONDAY MORNING, BIG NEWS IS THAT A FEMALE WOLF FROM SOUTHEASTERN ARIZONA HAS BEEN MAKING HER WAY THROUGH NEW MEXICO THE PAST MONTH OR SO.

CAN YOU GIVE US A LITTLE UPDATE ON WHERE SHE IS AND WHERE SHE HAS BEEN TRAVELING?

>> McGee: I CAN GIVE YOU AN UPDATE.

IN FACT, WE CAPTURED HER YESTERDAY AND MOVED HER TO OUR SEVILLETA PEN.

SHE WAS TRAVELING OFF IN NORTHEAST NEW MEXICO ABOUT 90 MILES NORTH OF I-40, ABOUT 15 MILES EAST OF ANGEL FIRE, KIND OF SETTLED IN IN THAT AREA.

AND HAS BEEN UP THERE FOR MOST OF THE MONTH OF JANUARY.

AND SO AS OF YESTERDAY, WE -- ANY TIME A WOLF MOVES NORTH OF I-40, OUR PROTOCOL IS TO MONITOR IT FOR AT LEAST 14 DAYS, SEE IF IT WILL MOVE BACK SOUTH OF I-40 ON ITS OWN.

OUR MAIN RECOVERY PROGRAM IS TRAINED TO RECOVER WOLVES SOUTH OF I-40.

ANY WOLVES THAT MOVE NORTH OF I-40 ARE FULLY PROTECTED UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT.

SOUTH OF I-40 WE HAVE 10J POPULATION THAT REDUCED REGULATIONS SO THAT WE CAN MORE EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WOLVES, ESPECIALLY A LARGE PREDATOR THAT EATS LIVESTOCK.

SO, WHEN WOLVES MOVE NORTH OF I-40 AND THEY ARE ATTACKING LIVESTOCK, THERE IS NOTHING LANDOWNERS CAN DO ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY ARE FULLY PROTECTED UNDER THE ACT.

AND THIS WOLF MOVED NORTH INTO AN AREA AND SETTLED ON PRIVATE LAND AND AFTER 14 DAYS IT WAS PRETTY OBVIOUS IT WASN'T GOING TO MOVE BACK DOWN SOUTH.

AT THE REQUEST OF THE LANDOWNERS WE CAPTURED IT AND IT IS CURRENTLY IN A PEN AT OUR SEVILLETA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.

>> Laura: WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO HER NEXT?

>> McGee: SHE WILL GO BACK OUT INTO THE WILD.

WE HAVE SEVERAL DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

SHE ORIGINATED OUT OF ARIZONA OUT OF THE PRIME CANYON PACK.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT IS PUTTING HER TOGETHER WITH A MATE RIGHT NOW AND RELEASING HER BACK OUT INTO THE WILD IN APRIL.

WE COULD PUT HER BACK OUT INTO THE WILD IN ARIZONA OR WE COULD TRANSLOCATE HER TO MEXICO AND RELEASE HER INTO THE WILD DOWN THERE.

PART OF THIS RECOVERY PROGRAM IS ESTABLISHING A SECOND POPULATION IN MEXICO ABOUT 150 MILES SOUTH OF THE BORDER OF ARIZONA, NEW MEXICO BORDER.

AND RIGHT NOW THE POPULATION DOWN THERE IS ABOUT 30 TO 40 INDIVIDUALS.

SO WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO BOOST THE POPULATION DOWN THERE.

OUR POPULATION HERE IN THE U.S. IS AROUND 200 INDIVIDUALS SO WE ARE DOING FAIRLY GOOD HERE IN THE U.S.

BUT WE ARE STILL TRYING TO BOLSTER THE POPULATION DOWN THERE AND SO RIGHT NOW, SHE IS IN CAPTIVITY.

HER GENETICS ARE ACTUALLY NOT VERY GOOD.

THEY ARE PRETTY REDUNDANT, SHE IS PRETTY INBRED SO WE ARE LOOKING AT SELECTING A MATE FOR HER THAT WOULD GIVE US THE BEST GENETICS AND BEST CONTRIBUTION IN THE WILD.

I AM WORRIED THAT IF WE WERE TO JUST TAKE HER AND TRANSLOCATE HER DIRECTLY TO THE WILD THAT SHE WOULD, YOU KNOW, WE CAN'T CONTROL WHO SHE MATES WITH AND SHE MIGHT SELECT SOMEBODY THAT PERPETUATES BAD GENETICS.

SO WE ARE TRYING TO BOLSTER THAT GENETICS BY SELECTING A MATE FOR HER AND THEN WE WILL RELEASE HER BACK OUT INTO THE WILD IN APRIL BEFORE SHE DENS AND HAS PUPS.

>> Laura: JUST TO BACK UP A LITTLE BIT, WHEN SHE LEFT ARIZONA IN DECEMBER, WHAT WAS SHE DOING?

WHAT WAS SHE LOOKING FOR?

>> McGee: SO, SHE IS A ONE-YEAR OLD FEMALE THAT IS DISPERSING FROM HER NATIVE PACK WHICH IS PRETTY COMMON FOR A ONE-YEAR OLD.

SOMETIMES THE FEMALES WILL STICK AROUND UNTIL THEY ARE TWO YEARS OLD AND HELP OUT WITH THE PACK, HELP RAISE THE OFFSPRING THE NEXT YEAR, BUT A LOT OF TIMES MOST WOLVES DISPERSE ABOUT ONE-YEAR OLD.

THEY GO LOOKING FOR NEW TERRITORIES, LOOKING FOR NEW MATES AND SO SHE TRAVELED OVER 350 MILES CROSSING MEXICO, MOVING NORTH.

SHE ACTUALLY CROSSED I-25 NEAR SEVILLETA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE, WENT OVER TOWARDS -- CROSSED THE NORTH PART OF WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, WENT OVER TOWARDS THE MANZANO MOUNTAINS AND CROSSED I-40 A COUPLE OF TIMES, JUST KIND OF EAST OF THE EDGEWOOD AREA IN THE EAST MOUNTAINS, SO, SHE WAS LOOKING FOR NEW TERRITORIES, LOOKING FOR NEW MATES.

AND WHERE SHE LANDED AND ESTABLISHED UP IN NORTHERN NEW MEXICO JUST EAST OF ANGEL FIRE, THERE IS NO OTHER WOLVES UP IN THAT AREA, IT IS RIGHT NOW IS THE PRIME MATING SEASON AND SO THERE WAS A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT HER JUST GETTING IN TROUBLE CONNECTING OR GETTING TOGETHER WITH DOGS OR RANCH DOGS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

SO, UP IN THAT AREA, SHE IS NOT CONTRIBUTING TO RECOVERY AND IT IS LIKELY TO GET IN TROUBLE.

SO THAT IS PART OF THE DECISION OF CAPTURING HER AND MOVING HER BACK DOWN SOUTH INTO THE RECOVERY AREA.

>> Laura: WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS SORT OF I-40 BOUNDARY AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, SOUTH OF THE BOUNDARY, LIVESTOCK OWNERS CAN HARASS OR HAZE WOLVES AWAY FROM THEIR LIVESTOCK.

NORTH OF I-40 THE FULL PROTECTIONS OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.

HOW DID THAT I-40 BOUNDARY, LIKE HOW IS THAT DECIDED UPON?

>> McGee: UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT WHEN WE DESIGNATE A 10J, WE HAVE TO DRAW LINES ON THE MAP.

THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT SAYS YOU HAVE GOT TO DRAW THE LINE SOMEWHERE.

MOST OF THE TIME WHENEVER WE DO 10J TO REINTRODUCE AN ANIMAL AND DRAW THOSE LINES ON THE MAP, WE DRAW IT AROUND THEIR HISTORIC RANGE.

AND THE HISTORIC RANGE OF THE MEXICAN WOLF IS SOUTH OF I-40 ALL THE WAY DOWN THROUGH SOUTH CENTRAL MEXICO.

HISTORICALLY 90% OF THE MEXICAN WOLF SUBSPECIES POPULATION OCCURRED IN MEXICO.

SO, BECAUSE OF THAT REASON, THE BOUNDARY WAS DROWN AT I-40.

>> Laura: HOW DOES THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE TRY TO FOCUS ON THE RECOVERY OF THIS SPECIES WITH SO MUCH CONTROVERSY ON ALL SIDES?

>> McGee: IT IS A VERY CONTROVERSIAL PROGRAM.

I DON'T KNOW OF TOO MANY OTHER PROGRAMS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY THAT ARE MORE CONTROVERSIAL.

I MEAN, WE HAVE GOT NORTHERN GRAYS AND GRIZZLY BEARS BUT MEXICAN WOLVES ARE RIGHT UP THERE WITH THE MOST CONTROVERSIAL SPECIES TO TRY TO RECOVER.

IT MAKES IT VERY DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO FIND THE BALANCE OF GROWING A POPULATION AND ALSO AT THE SAME TIME OFFSETTING THE IMPACTS THAT IT HAS ON THE LIVESTOCK INDUSTRY.

SO, ONE OF OUR PRIMARY GOALS OF THIS PROGRAM IS TO TRY TO MANAGE AND REDUCE LIVESTOCK DEPREDATIONS WHEN THEY DO OCCUR THROUGH THE SOUTHWEST.

SO WE HAVE A NUMBER OF TOOLS, A NUMBER OF PARTNERS.

WE PARTNER WITH ARIZONA GAME AND FISH, NEW MEXICO GAME AND FISH, USDA WILDLIFE SERVICES, FOREST SERVICE.

WE HAVE A LOT OF PARTNERS IN THIS PROGRAM AND EACH ONE OF THEM WE ARE ALL WORKING TOGETHER.

WE ARE CONTRIBUTING MONEY TO RANGE RIDERS, TO ALL SORTS OF HAZING AND HARASSING TECHNIQUES TO PREVENT DEPREDATIONS.

WE CAN'T ALWAYS PREVENT IT.

A LOT OF TIMES WE CAN, THOUGH, SO, WE SPEND A VAST AMOUNT OF TIME, EFFORT, ENERGY, STAFF, PERSONNEL, RESOURCES TO REDUCE LIVESTOCK DEPREDATIONS AS PART OF THE PROGRAM.

ONE OF OUR PRIMARY GOALS.

WITHOUT THAT WE WON'T HAVE THE SOCIAL TOLERANCE OR TOLERANCE TO BE ABLE TO RECOVER WOLVES HERE IN THE SOUTHWEST.

>> Laura: DO YOU FEEL LIKE OVER THE COURSE OF THE PROGRAM AND BY HAVING THESE MEASURES IN PLACE, HAVE RANCHERS IN SOUTHWESTERN NEW MEXICO BECOME MORE TOLERANT OF WOLVES?

>> McGee: SOME HAVE AND SOME HAVEN'T.

AND I DON'T THINK SOME EVER WILL BUT I THINK THERE ARE A NUMBER OF RANCHERS OUT THERE THAT WE ARE WORKING WITH THAT ARE ALTERING THEIR OPERATION ALSO, THAT ARE USING OUR PREVENTIVE MEASURES, THAT ARE TRYING TO REALLY WORK ON WAYS OF OFFSETTING THE IMPACTS.

AND WE HAVE A LOT OF CASES WHERE WE HAVE GOT WOLVES DENNING WITH LIVESTOCK OR AROUND LIVESTOCK AND A LOT OF PACKS THAT ARE NOT DEPREDATING ON LIVESTOCK, SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THE MEASURES ARE WORKING.

IT IS NEVER GOING TO BE FOOLPROOF.

WOLVES WILL EAT COWS, YOU KNOW.

THEIR PRIMARY PREY SOURCE IS ELK.

SO, WHENEVER THEY ARE HUNGRY OR IT IS EASIER TO KILL A COW AND THEY ARE IN THAT AREA, THEY ARE GOING TO DO SO.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IF WE CAN HAZE THEM, HARASS THEM, TEACH THEM NOT TO AND STAY AWAY FROM COWS, THEN, THAT IS ONE OF OUR PRIMARY GOALS.

>> Laura: BRADY, THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I APPRECIATE YOU TALKING ME THROUGH THIS CONTROVERSIAL TOPIC.

>> McGee: THANK YOU.

>> Gene: WELCOME BACK TO OUR PANEL FOR ONE FINAL DISCUSSION ON MODERNIZING THE STATE LEGISLATURE.

WE HAVE TOLD YOU ABOUT THE RECENT POLL RELEASED BY COMMON CAUSE NEW MEXICO SHOWING A MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN NEW MEXICO SUPPORT CHANGES LIKE LENGTHENING SESSIONS, GROWING LEGISLATIVE STAFF AND PAYING LAWMAKERS, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.

NOW A NEW BILL IS PROPOSING TERM LIMITS FOR STATE SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES.

THERE ARE A FEW SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT CERTAINLY.

THERE ARE THOSE WHO FEEL INCUMBENTS HAVE A FIRM ADVANTAGE IN OUR SYSTEM WITHOUT TERM LIMITS.

AND THAT ADDING THEM INHERENTLY CREATES A BETTER REPRESENTATION.

BUT THERE IS ALSO AN ARGUMENT THAT IF AND WHEN A COMMUNITY FINDS A LEADER WHO REPRESENTS THEIR INTERESTS, TERM LIMITS WILL EVENTUALLY FORCE THEM OUT EARLIER THAN THEY MIGHT WANT.

RECOGNIZING THIS, T.J. A LOT OF NUANCE HERE.

DO YOU THINK TERM LIMITS FRANKLY ARE A GOOD IDEA FOR NEW MEXICO AS THEY ARE PROPOSED?

I SHOULD SAY THE PROPOSAL HERE IS TO INCREASE SENATOR TERMS FROM FOUR TO SIX YEARS, REPRESENTATIVE TERMS FROM TWO TO FOUR YEARS, BUT MAKE THEM CAP AT THREE YEARS CONCURRENTLY.

>> Trout: I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS.

AND I WAS THINKING HOW DO I MAKE THIS A NONPOLITICAL ISSUE SO I AM THINKING OF THIS JUST FROM MY HEART.

SO, NO.

1, IF YOU INCREASE IT TO 6 YEARS AND THREE TERMS, THAT IS 18 YEARS.

THAT IS A GENERATIONAL THING ANYWAY.

IF YOU'RE IN, YOU'RE IN FOR A GENERATION OF PEOPLE.

ACTUALLY EVEN THE THREE, FOUR YEAR TERMS IS A LONG TIME.

I THINK THE QUESTION COMES DOWN TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU TRUST US, THE PEOPLE, TO BE ABLE TO KEEP COMING UP WITH NEW PEOPLE WHO WANT TO PERFORM PUBLIC SERVICE.

IS IT A BENEFIT TO THE STATE TO OFFER THAT TO US TO BE ABLE TO HAVE MORE PEOPLE, MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO PERFORM PUBLIC SERVICE AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT SOMEBODY WHO HAS BEEN ENTRENCHED IN THERE FOREVER.

I UNDERSTAND THE ARGUMENT BEING SOME OF THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE ENTRENCHED ARE VERY GOOD AT WHAT THEY DO.

BUT DOES THAT MEAN THERE ARE OTHER PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO ARE NOT?

AND I UNDERSTAND WITH THE GOP AT THIS POINT, THEY ARE SAYING, WELL, YEAH, WE WANT TO GET RID OF SOME OF THESE PEOPLE.

SO, YEAH, TERM LIMITS, LET'S DO THIS AND GET NEW BLOOD IN THERE.

>> Gene: I SPEAK SPECIFICALLY OF SENATOR CRAIG BRANDT FROM RIO RANCHO.

HE IS THE ONE PUSHING THIS.

IT IS NOT A BILL.

IT IS A MORE OF A DISCUSSION POINT, MEMORIAL, TO KIND OF GET THINGS GOING.

HE SAYS IT WOULD ALLOW FOR FRESH IDEAS AND MORE REPRESENTATION CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE.

I AM NOT SURE WHAT HE MEANS ABOUT THAT.

DO YOU KNOW WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT WHEN HE SAYS REPRESENTATION CLOSER TO THE PEOPLE?

>> Latham: WELL, I THINK AS YOU SEE THIS SWELL OF PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATES, IN PARTICULAR, ARE REALLY RUNNING ON THE FACT THAT THEY ARE OF THE PEOPLE, YOU KNOW.

SO, THE REPUBLICAN PARTY REALLY HAS TO DO SOMETHING TO COUNTER THAT AS WELL.

I THINK TO THE POINT OF 12 YEARS, 18 YEARS, WE HAVE GOT LEGISLATORS, I THINK BOBBY GONZALES HAS BEEN THERE FOR OVER 30 YEARS.

HE IS AMAZING.

HE IS AMAZING.

BUT I THINK GIVING A LONGER PIPELINE, TERM LIMITS, IF YOU'RE DOING YOUR JOB, THAT IS TIME TO CULTIVATE NEW CANDIDATES.

I THINK IT HAS TO GO HAND IN HAND WITH SALARYING THEM.

I HAVE DONE A FULL 180 ON THIS OVER THE YEARS.

I USED TO THINK THAT THE PEOPLE THAT YOU WANT IN GOVERNMENT ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WANT IT SO BAD THEY ARE WILLING TO DO IT FOR FREE.

WELL, NOW I REALIZE, IF YOU PAY PEANUTS YOU GET MONKEYS.

WHAT WE HAVE IS THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO DO A JOB FOR FREE, YOU KNOW, LIKE, YOU'RE KEEPING A LOT OF PEOPLE OUT, LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, YOU KNOW, IF I EVER WANTED TO RUN FOR THE LEGISLATURE, I COULDN'T, BECAUSE I HAVE TO KEEP MY FAMILY IN THE LIFE-STYLE THEY ARE ACCUSTOMED TO.

AND THE PER DIEM IN THE LEGISLATURE WOULD NOT COVER THAT.

BUT THERE ARE LIKE PLENTY OF GREAT IDEAS, PLENTY OF BRILLIANT PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO COULD ABSOLUTELY HELP US TURN THIS SHIP AROUND BUT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DO IT FOR FREE BECAUSE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE WORTH.

>> Gene: I THINK THAT IS RIGHT.

THAT IS AN EXCELLENT POINT AND WE'LL COME BACK TO HOW THIS COULD POSSIBLY WORK IN A PART-TIME LEGISLATURE.

AND, YES, INTERESTINGLY A QUOTE FROM SENATOR BRANDT, "I AM TRYING TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT I HAVE SEEN IN OTHER STATES THAT HAVE DONE TERM LIMITS, WHERE IF THE TERM LIMIT IS TOO SHORT, THE BUREAUCRATS END UP RUNNING EVERYTHING."

I WOULD AGREE WITH HIM.

CONTINUING THE QUOTE.

"SO I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO STRIKE THAT BALANCE."

GOING BACK TO T.J.'S THOUGHT.

IS THAT BALANCE, HAVING 18 YEARS IN A ROW?

THAT IS LONG TIME TO BE IN OFFICE.

SAME ISSUES ABOUT INCUMBENCY STILL HOLD, IT WOULD SEEM TO ME, FOR THOSE THREE TERMS.

>> Andy: I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT CRAIG BRANDT IS STARTING HIS TENTH YEAR IN THE LEGISLATURE RIGHT AT THAT POINT.

AND THAT IS NOT A KNOCK ON ANYBODY SPECIFICALLY HIM, BUT JUST THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS AN IDEA OF FRESH BLOOD IN THERE.

ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS STARTING FROM SCRATCH, RIGHT?

YOU TRY TO GET SOMEBODY NEW IN THERE, HOW DO YOU GET LEADERSHIP ROLES, RIGHT?

AGAIN, GOING TO SENATOR BRANDT, HE IS IN A LEADERSHIP ROLE AFTER SO MANY YEARS IN THERE AND THAT IS SORT OF WHAT YOU EXPECT TO NATURALLY HAPPEN.

SO, I THINK THAT IS THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS ARGUMENT IS HOW DO YOU CREATE THIS SORT OF INSTITUTIONAL KNOWLEDGE WHEN IT IS RESET EVERY -- I GUESS IT WOULD BE MORE THAN JUST SIX YEARS BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO OR THREE TERMS, RIGHT.

I THINK, AGAIN, IT IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO COME UP AGAIN.

I DON'T SEE IT MAKING IT VERY FAR THIS YEAR, WITHOUT SORT OF PROFESSIONALIZING THE LEGISLATURE.

>> Gene: SPEAKING OF WHICH, TO REBECCA'S POINT, T.J. TROUT, LENGTHENING THE SESSION, DOES THAT MAKE THIS MORE PALATABLE IF WE ARE AT A SIX-MONTH SCHEME, FULL-TIME SCHEME?

>> Trout: THE THING I HATE ABOUT POLITICS, NATIONAL POLITICS AND STATE POLITICS, ESPECIALLY WITH TWO-YEAR TERMS, IS EVERYBODY -- THESE PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS PERPETUALLY RUNNING FOR OFFICE AND THAT IS ALL THEY ARE CONCERNED ABOUT.

IT DRIVES ME NUTS ESPECIALLY ON A NATIONAL LEVEL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

THAT IS JUST CRAZY.

TO YOUR POINT, THE THING ABOUT THAT, I DON'T THINK YOU'LL HAVE LIKE A COMPLETE TURNOVER ON THE LEGISLATURE.

LIKE EVERYBODY IS NOT GOING TO TERM OUT AT THE SAME TIME.

SO, I THINK WHAT WE ARE GOING TO SEE IS WE ARE STILL GOING TO HAVE LEADERS IN POWER, NOT EVERYBODY JUST, YOU'RE ALL GONE, SO WE HAVE GOT A BUNCH OF NEWBIES COMING IN SO YOU ALL ARE GOING TO LEARN THE ROPES AT THE SAME TIME.

I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD PROBABLY HAPPEN.

REBECCA, I AGREE WITH YOU, THOUGH, ABOUT PAYING PEOPLE.

I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE -- THERE IS TOO MANY PROBLEMS IN THE STATE TO HAVE PART-TIME PEOPLE OUT THERE AND LET'S GET SOME NEW BLOOD IN THERE, MEANING EDUCATORS.

YOU WANT TO BE A LEGISLATOR?

LET'S HAVE TEACHERS BE LEGISLATORS AND BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO DO THAT.

ARTISTS.

>> Gene: GOD FOR BID.

AN ARTIST.

LET'S GO BACK TO WHAT WE STARTED WITH THAT COMMON CAUSE POLL.

THE PUBLIC IS WAY AHEAD OF, IT SEEMS LIKE, OUR LEGISLATURE.

THE PUBLIC WANTS THIS.

70% WANT LONGER SESSIONS.

46% OF THAT WAS STRONGLY SUPPORT.

64% WANT PAID.

IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE.

PUBLIC WANTS THIS NOW.

ARE WE JUST THAT FAR BEHIND?

>> Latham: I THINK WE ARE THAT FAR BEHIND.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO TREAT THE LEGISLATURE WITH THE PROFESSIONALISM THAT WE EXPECT FROM MEMBERS OF THE LEGISLATURE.

THE FACT THAT THEY DON'T HAVE STAFF MEMBERS, THAT THEY ARE RELYING ON LOBBYISTS TO VET BILLS AND HELP THEM FIGURE OUT WHAT THEIR POSITION IS, LIKE THAT IS WRONG.

WE NEED TO -- THEY DESERVE IT.

I THINK WE 100% NEED TO EXTEND THE SESSION, AT LEAST LOOK AT 60 EVERY YEAR, BECAUSE AS LONG AS THERE ARE BILLS TRYING TO DESIGNATE A STATE SCENT, THERE WILL BE BILLS THAT NEVER MAKE IT DOWN.

EVERY MEMORIAL.

EVERY UNFUNDED MANDATE, EVERY SMELL, EVERY SONG, EVERY TIME A LEGISLATOR SINGS HAPPY BIRTHDAY, LIKE, EVERY SINGLE, IF WE ARE GOING TO KEEP DOING THAT, THEN THEY HAVE GOT TO GIVE THEMSELVES 60 DAYS EVERY YEAR.

>> Gene: IT IS AMAZING, ISN'T IT?

PREDICTIONS ON WHERE YOU THINK THIS MIGHT LAND.

A LOT OF COMMITTEES TO GET THROUGH, CERTAINLY.

TERM LIMITS.

>> Andy: I DON'T KNOW THAT IT IS GOING TO GET ALL THAT FAR.

I THINK YOU SEE THIS A LOT IN DIFFERENT AREAS OF THE LEGISLATURE BUT THEY ARE ESSENTIALLY VOTING ON THEIR OWN JOB, RIGHT?

I THINK THAT WOULD TAKE -- >> Gene: DOES IT MAKE THE JOB MORE OR LESS ATTRACTIVE TO KNOW YOUR TERM LIMITED OUT?

CRAIG BRANDT SAYS IT WILL MAKE FOR BETTER LEGISLATORS.

I MEAN, WOULD THAT BE ATTRACTIVE TO A DIFFERENT CUT OF PERSON?

>> Trout: 18 YEARS IS A LONG TIME.

IT IS A GENERATIONAL TIME.

YOU COULD AMASS ENOUGH POWER IF THAT IS WHAT YOU'RE AFTER, ENOUGH VOTES RIGHT AND IN 18 YEARS IF YOU CAN'T GET SOMETHING DONE WORTHWHILE, THEN YOU HAVE A REAL PROBLEM.

THEN, AGAIN, YOU ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE VOTED OUT EVERY SIX YEARS.

>> Gene: THAT IS A GOOD POINT.

IT ALL COMES DOWN TO THAT.

>> Latham: INSTEAD OF TERM LIMITS BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE GOT LAME DUCKS AT THE END INSTEAD OF TERM LIMITS MAKING THE JOB MORE APPEALING, LET THE CONSTITUENTS DECIDE WHEN YOUR TERM SHOULD BE UP.

>> Gene: THAT IS THE FINAL WORD.

THANKS TO OUR PANELISTS THIS WEEK.

BE SURE TO LET US KNOW WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT ANY OF THE TOPICS THE LINE COVERED ON FACEBOOK, TWITTER OR INSTAGRAM PAGES AND CATCH ANY EPISODE YOU MAY HAVE MISSED ON THE PBS APP ON YOUR ROKU OR SMART TV.

HERE IS MY THOUGHT ON THE TERM LIMIT DISCUSSION EARLIER.

HOW ABOUT NO TERM LIMITS?

LET ME BACK UP HERE.

AS YOU HEARD US DISCUSS THE IDEA, IT INCREASED REPRESENTATIVES TERMS FROM TWO YEARS TO FOUR YEARS AND SENATORIAL TERMS FROM FOUR YEARS TO SIX YEARS IN OUR LEGISLATURE, NOW BOTH WITH THREE TERM CAPS.

SOUNDS GOOD?

NOT TO ME.

THREE SIX YEAR TERMS IN A ROW FOR A SENATOR MAY AS WELL BE A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT.

ISN'T 18 YEARS IN A ROW NOTHING LESS THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW AS T.J.

MENTIONED EARLIER?

SAME FOR THE 12 YEARS THE AMENDMENT PROPOSES FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

NOW YOU CAN DO A LOT OF GOOD IN 12 OR 18 YEARS, BUT YOU CAN ALSO CLOG A LOT OF PIPELINES IN THAT TIME AS WELL.

WHAT FRUSTRATES ME ABOUT TERM LIMITS IS THE NOTION THAT A TERM LIMIT WILL SOMEHOW MAGICALLY CHANGE BEHAVIOR.

THAT SOMEHOW THIS TICKING CLOCK IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM MAKES FOR BETTER GOVERNANCE.

IT DOESN'T.

IT HAS NEVER BEEN PROVEN THAT WAY.

WHAT DOES WORK IS THE VOTE OF THE PEOPLE AND THEIR IDEA OF WHO SHOULD COME AND GO AT THEIR CHOOSING.

MAYBE I AM BIASED GROWING UP IN A STATE WITH NO TERM LIMITS AND I HAVE WITNESSED MAYORS ENJOY TERMS OF, BLOCK YOUR EARS, SENATOR BRANDT, 16 YEARS AND THEN 24 YEARS AND YOU WOULDN'T FIND A SOUL THERE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT.

TERM LIMITS ARE A WHITE FLAG.

FIRST THE IDEA IS INSULTING TO ANYONE WHO TAKES THE IDEA OF VOTING SERIOUSLY.

HERE IS THE REAL PROBLEM.

IF SENATOR BRANDT AND THE OTHERS OF A LIKE MIND ARE SAYING THEY WON'T CONSIDER BILLS AIMED AT MODERNIZING OUR 1920 STYLE OF GOVERNANCE UNLESS THERE ARE TERM LIMITS, THAT IS NOT A GOOD THING.

ONE CANNOT PREDICT A SCENARIO WHERE A SMALL GROUP WILL STAMP THEIR FEET AND VOTE NO ON OUR DESPERATELY NEEDED UPGRADING UNLESS THEY GET THEIR WAY WITH TERM LIMITS.

THAT IS NOT SO GOOD FOR PROGRESS, GUYS.

WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD.

THANKS AGAIN FOR JOINING US AND STAYING INFORMED AND ENGAGED.

SEE YOU AGAIN NEXT WEEK, IN FOCUS.

>> FUNDING FOR NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS PROVIDED BY VIEWERS LIKE YOU.