State recovered over $1 million from corporate polluters
Last year, we gave $75,000 to the state Office of Natural Resources Trustee, which was underfunded and indeed forgotten about for many, many years. In return, that small state office has already recovered more than a million dollars from corporations
responsible for harming New Mexico communities and our environment, a 15-fold return on investment. And, with the help of tribal partners, those dollars will be going straight into communities that have suffered from contamination and pollution.
Source: 2021 State of the State Address to New Mexico legislature
, Jan 26, 2021
Invest in healthy soil program to improve health & yield
HB204: House Bill 204 appropriates $5.15 million from the general fund to New Mexico State University to create a healthy soil program.
Summary by Conservation Voters New Mexico: HB 204 creates a healthy soil program within the
Department of Agriculture which would promote and support farming and ranching systems and other forms of land management that increase soil organic matter, carbon content, aggregate stability, microbiology and water retention to improve
the health, and yield and profitability of the soils of the state.
Legislative Outcome:
Passed House 48-6-16 on Mar/6/2019; Passed Senate 34-0-8 on Mar/9/19; Signed by Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham on Apr/2/2019
A BILL to require the Secretary of Agriculture to establish a national disclosure standard for bioengineered foods.
Cato Institute recommendation on voting YES: President Obama quietly signed legislation requiring special labeling for commercial foods containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs)--plants and animals with desirable genetic traits that were directly implanted in a laboratory. Most of the foods that humans & animals have consumed for millennia have been genetically modified, by cross-fertilization. Yet the new law targets only the highly precise gene manipulations done in laboratories. Anti-GMO activists oppose the new law because it preempts more rigorous regulation. And that`s exactly the goal of this bill, to the frustration of the anti-GMO crowd.
JustLabelit.org recommendation on voting NO (because not restrictive enough): Senators Roberts (R-KS) and Stabenow (D-MI) introduced a compromise bill that would create a mandatory,
national labeling standard for GMO foods. This bill falls short of what consumers expect--a simple at-a-glance disclosure on the package. As written, this compromise might not even apply to ingredients derived from GMO soybeans and GMO sugar beets. We in the consumer rights community have dubbed this the `Deny Americans the Right-to-Know` Act (DARK Act). We need to continue pressing for mandatory GMO labeling on the package.
Heritage Foundation recommendation on voting NO (because too restrictive): The House should allow [states, at their choice,] to impose [a more] restrictive labeling mandate, but prohibit the state from regulating out-of-state food manufacturers engaged in interstate commerce. Instituting a new, sweeping, federal mandate that isn`t based on proven science shouldn`t even be an option.
Legislative outcome: Passed by the Senate on July 7th, passed by the House on July 14th; signed by the President on July 29th
Source: Congressional vote 16-S0764 on Jun 23, 2016