From the Daily Signal: 

EXCLUSIVE: Audit Finds Signs of Fraud in New Mexico House Race

by Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH

An audit of absentee ballots suggests fraud may have occurred in one of the closest House races in the country, The Daily Signal has learned.

Democrat Xochitl Torres Small squeaked by Republican Yvette Herrell in the final results of the Nov. 6 election.

On election night, Herrell declared victory in the race to represent New Mexico’s 2nd Congressional District. But as more votes were counted, Torres Small secured the win. 

The roughly 3,500-vote victory for Torres Small–out of about 200,000 cast in the southern New Mexico district–relied heavily on absentee ballots from Doña Ana County, the largest county in the district, including the Las Cruces area. 

A new audit report: https://goo.gl/EtkWXA obtained by The Daily Signal alleges a “concerted effort” to push for absentee votes where New Mexico voter ID laws are not enforced. It also points to potential fraud in applying for absentee ballots, and says a significant number of absentee ballots were time-stamped after the 7 p.m. deadline election night. 

The report was prepared for the losing Herrell campaign by Full Compliance Consulting LLC and Herrell campaign lawyer Carter B. Harrison.

Herrell’s campaign is not contesting the outcome of the 2018 contest, but sought the review based on its concerns that extra votes appeared to pour in. 

Torres Small spokeswoman Jennifer Lee did not respond to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal for this story. 

Torres Small, 34, who was sworn in Jan. 3, replaced retiring Rep. Steve Pearce, a Republican who was re-elected by 26 points in 2016.

The House seat has been held by a Republican for all but one term since 1968. 

Donald Trump, the Republican nominee for president, won the district by 10 points over Democrat Hillary Clinton in 2016. 

The report says the consulting firm reviewed about 12,000 requests for absentee ballots, 8,577 outer envelopes for absentee ballots, and hundreds of rejected applications from Doña Ana County. 

“There were not enough irregularities in Dona Ana County alone to alter our race (though local races could have been altered),” Harrison, the Herrell campaign lawyer, told The Daily Signal in a written response. “But if other counties were to be found to have similar irregularities, the race certainly could have been altered by them.”

On election night, media outlets called the race for Herrell, 54, who has been a member of the New Mexico House of Representatives since 2011.  

But well after midnight, Harrison said, the office of New Mexico’s secretary of state informed the Herrell campaign of 4,000 absentee ballots in Dona Ana County still to be counted, which would not have flipped the race to Torres Small, who previously had not held elective office. 

However, the state informed the campaign of another 4,000 absentee votes that had been counted but not tabulated, which was enough to change the outcome.  

The report says nongovernmental groups “are almost certainly engaging in at best aggressive—and at worst fraudulent—procurement of absentee ballot applications.” 

This would have involved an outside group that requested a large quantity of absentee ballots on behalf of others, possibly without their knowledge. 

Thousands of Absentee Ballots were Mysteriously not Returned

Fully 25 percent of the people who purportedly requested absentee ballots from the Doña Ana County clerk didn’t mail them back, according to the report. 

That is more than twice the statewide average for unreturned absentee ballots. To receive an absentee ballot for mailing back, a voter first must send in an application providing a reason why he or she can’t vote in person on Election Day. 

“This is suggestive of the possibility that someone was submitting absentee ballot applications for Democrats and those deemed likely to vote for Democrats,” the report says, adding: 

Also consistent with potential absentee ballot-application fraud is the apparently high rate of applications rejected for incorrect Voter ID or for submitting duplicate applications, i.e., where the same voter purportedly applies twice for an absentee ballot.

In 2016, a presidential year, 17.5 percent who had absentee ballots from Doña Ana County didn’t mail in the ballots, a percentage almost identical to the statewide rate and slightly above the comparable counties of Bernalillo and Chaves.

(advertisement)

FULL COMPLIANCE CONSULTING, LLC — Research and Analysis of Elections-Related Issues in New Mexico

Assisting candidates, elected officials, committees, PACs, lobbyists, and law firms in navigating Campaign Finance Reporting, Campaign Practices, the Governmental Conduct Act, and the details of the New Mexico Election Code.

 ♦ Petitions ♦ Ballot Access ♦ Petition Challenges ♦ Recounts ♦ Contests ♦ Impoundments ♦ Research

Statewide Offices • Congressional Races • Legislative Races • Municipal Elections • School Board Elections • County Offices • Judicial & Regional Offices • Ballot Questions • Ballot Petitions and Signature Verification

Email: fccllc@terrcomm.net   Full Compliance Consulting, LLC    P.O. Box 2163 ♦ Santa Fe, NM 87504

(advertisement)

However, in 2018, the statewide rate of unreturned ballots was 12.1 percent, and comparable counties were below the statewide average.

“In the 2018 election, there was a concerted effort to encourage absentee voting,” the report says, adding: 

The numbers cited above, both with regard to the steep increase in total absentee votes cast as well as the high number of unreturned ballots, cannot be explained any other way. Much of this effort may have been perfectly lawful, but the 25 percent non-return rate indicates such a high rate of ‘unawareness’ on the part of those who supposedly requested the ballots that it is possible there may have been fraud in this area, as well.

Harvesting absentee ballots would be a fourth-degree felony under state law if applications were altered, Harrison said. 

The legal case against mass procurement of absentee ballot applications could depend on whether forgery occurred, said Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at The Heritage Foundation

“It depends on whether the organizations [filled out applications] themselves and forged the signatures of the voters, or did they go to the voters and say would you like an absentee ballot, and help them with that,” von Spakovsky told The Daily Signal. 

Sometimes, absentee voter fraud is easy to spot, he said. 

“If on Election Day, a candidate wins 60-40, but all the absentee ballots are 90 percent for the loser, that doesn’t make any sense,” said von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department lawyer. “Absentee ballots usually have the same proportion as votes on Election Day. If they don’t, that’s a possible clue that something may have been done.”

The report also found that 577 absentee ballots in the New Mexico race were time-stamped after the 7 p.m. deadline. 

“We do have strong concerns about those ballots. The statute is clear: No ballots may be accepted after the deadline,” Harrison said. 

The report cites some instances of unusual addresses for absentee voters, noting: 

—5 envelopes that provided a registration address that did not match the absentee register.

—25 envelopes that listed 845 N. Motel—the county clerk’s address—as the registration address. 

—49 envelopes with no registration address provided.  

— 23 envelopes with a P.O. Box provided instead of a registration address.  

New Mexico's Current Voter ID Law is Not Being Followed

Regarding the state’s voter ID law, the report contends that “there is no convincing basis … to exempt absentee ballots from the same requirements that are mandatory for all other methods of voting.” 

Previously, New Mexico required the signature of a witness as well as the voter on an absentee ballot. However, in 1993, the state Legislature passed a law removing that requirement. 

The report notes that as a result, absentee ballots need only the voter’s signature. 

“Today, however, the name, address, and year of birth fields are the Voter ID, and it makes no sense not to verify that information, as is required for every other type of voting,” the report says. “The removal of the second signature eliminated the crucial element in confirming the voter was who he or she claimed to be, but replaced it with the new ID standard.”

Neither the New Mexico Secretary of State’s Office, which oversees elections, nor the Doña Ana County Clerk’s Office responded to inquiries about the situation.

“We do not require photo ID in New Mexico, but we do require voters to provide their name, address, and year of birth,” Harrison said, adding:

This law was ignored with the absentee ballots in Doña Ana County. More generally, if absentee voting is going to be converted from a backstop form of voting for out-of-town or bedridden voters to something that independent groups try to promote through mail and on-the-ground canvassing, then there frankly needs to be more attention given to security–and more attention given to the operation of those groups.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Pelosi speaking early this afternoon, appears to be threatening the American people with the specter of “a future Democratic President declaring a ‘national emergency’ because of gun violence” and using such a declaration to make some sort of move on 2nd Amendment protections.

We think she’s making a mistake implying this threat. And we believe this little speech will come back to haunt her.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Yesterday, the Socorro County Commission voted to designate all of Socorro County as a “Second Amendment Sanctuary County.” Socorro joins Quay County which passed a similar resolution.

The moves are motivated by the ongoing 2019 Legislative Session in which House Democrats continue to pass numerous anti-2nd amendment bills—bills which are overwhelmingly opposed by New Mexico law enforcement officers, as well as thousands of New Mexicans.

A bipartisan group of 29 New Mexico Sheriffs, including the Sheriff from Socorro County, opposes many of the anti-2nd amendment bills which the New Mexico House Democrat Caucus is attempting to force on the state.

The Socorro County Resolution:

"NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Socorro by the authority granted the Board by the laws of the State of New Mexico and people of Socorro County, New Mexico to stand and defend their rights and liberties, which are guaranteed by the United States and New Mexico Constitutions, we hereby declare this Resolution as follows:

Second Amendment Preservation Resolution Designating Socorro County a Second Amendment “Sanctuary County”

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board affirms its support for the duly elected Sheriff of Socorro County, New Mexico in the exercise of his sound discretion and affirms its resolve to support decisions by our Sheriff to not enforce any unconstitutional firearms law against any citizen.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board will not authorize or appropriate government funds, resources, employees, agencies, contractors, buildings, detention centers or offices for the purpose of enforcing law that unconstitutionally infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

Socorro County State Representative Expressed Support for the “Sanctuary County” Designation

On Wednesday, Representative Gail Armstrong expressed support for the pro-2nd amendment resolution passed in Socorro County. 

“It’s clear these bills, which are an attack on our 2nd amendment rights, are not supported by people in Socorro County and all over New Mexico,” said Rep. Gail Armstrong (R-Magdalena).

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Democrats are applying an ENTIRELY NEW set of “STANDARDS”— totally and incomprehensibly inconsistent — to Governor Northam, Lt. Gov. Fairfax, and Atty Gen. Herring.

NOTE: Republicans are being consistent—again discussing such unusual and innovative ideas as “due process.” Democrats, who just four months ago pretended they had not heard of such a refined and advanced legal concept, are now embracing it like it’s the Holy Grail—and referring to it as if they are on intimate terms with it.

House Bill 100, introduced by Representative Derrick J. Lente of  Sandia Pueblo and Representative Andrea Romero of Santa Fe, renames Columbus Day, designating it as "Indigenous Peoples' Day."

In presenting the bill on the floor of the House, Representative Romero, who became somewhat famous this past year for essentially stealing* from the expense accounts of the Regional Coalition of LANL Communities* (RCLC), made the following remarks:

"I am happily supporting this legislation as New Mexicans I believe we cherish our native and indigenous communities. Indigenous Peoples' Day reaffirms our support for our native communities that have truly made us the Land of Enchantment. This legislation is about honoring our rich and diverse cultural history and recognizing that native communities are core to our state's identity. Recognizing Columbus Day, um, someone [sic] who neither discovered America or treated native Americans with respect, has been an affront to Native communities who founded our country. Indigenous People's Day is a way to honor, recognize and celebrate the contribution native communities have made to our state. With that, we stand for questions."

First things first: Native communities did not "found" our country. Our "country" is the United States, and the founding of the United States is covered in all the history books—at least until all those courses were replaced with "Women's Studies," and a "Survey of LGBT Communities." 

Second, Native Americans all over what is now the United States (and the Americas) displaced peoples who were there before them. The Athabascan-speaking peoples (the Navajo and Apache) arrived in the Southwest at about the same time Columbus made his first voyage, though some scholars believe it may have been 40 to 50 years earlier.

In any case, they weren't "native" to the land until then. And they themselves supplanted other peoples in the Southwest when they moved south from what is now Canada. The Plains Indians did the same, populating a region stretching from the present-day Dakotas to Kansas.

Andrea Romero and the Columbian Exchange: Her Famous Burritos

The speech shown above is somewhat ironic, for Representative Romero at least, in that the expense account she abused for the RCLC, recorded her as guzzling burritos almost daily—as a "travel, per diem, and mileage expense," even though she didn't actually travel anywhere. She just ate burritos for lunch every day and charged them to a somewhat witless RCLC board. 

So why is it ironic, at least a little? Well, the "burrito" is a cross-cultural phenomenon, appearing in Mexico in the 19th Century.

It's made with a flour tortilla—something that was not possible until the occurrence of what is called the Columbian Exchange—a name given to the widespread transfer of plants, animals, technology, culture, populations, and ideas between Europe and the Americas—brought about by Columbus's explorations.

The Spanish brought wheat to the Americas. Unlike corn, it was one of the world's major grain crops which the local populations did not have. Thus it became possible to make a flour tortilla, an item for which Romero apparently charged RCLC hundreds of dollars per year.

The COLUMBIAN EXCHANGE to be REVERSED

If the proponents of the Indigenous Peoples' Day bill were sincere, they would have included a provision that rolls back all the changes brought about by the work that originated with Columbus. 

Simply put, they could have committed themselves to abandoning everything in New Mexico that isn't "Native American." Those items would include such things as:

The wheel. 

We would have more respect for Romero if she'd said something like:

"We actually think we will be better off, environmentally, dragging stuff on a blanket tied between two long poles, pulled by a dog, than to have trucks transporting everything and polluting the air and tearing up highways."

We would also have more respect for her if she had noted that we need to slowly, over time, get rid of such things as horses, cows, sheep (although a Navajo representative may have objected to this), hogs, chickens, goats, rabbits, and cats.

And don't forget coffee, sugarcane, bananas, apples, apricots, cucumbers, carrots, pomegranates, wheat, barley, rye, oats, sorghum, pistachios, spinach, watermelons (there could be an objection from Sandia Pueblo) olives, onions, peaches and scores of other plants and crops.

At least she enjoyed the "calabacita" burritos, which of course is something the Native populations gave to Europeans. (For the record, rye was also part of the European contribution to the Americas, making possible yet another Romero purchase.)

An Ugly Display—Designed to Divide, not to "Heal" or Do Anything Else

The whole scene in the state house was, well, rather silly. Don't get us wrong—we don't blame Romero or Lente. True, they have no idea what they are talking about, but that's not necessarily their fault, nor are they alone. Most Leftists today merely mimic and parrot popular memes they get from Leftist "community organizers" and such. 

As part of all the angry, resentful commentary about Columbus, this bill reinforces something that, oddly, English propagandizers—among others— created: The Black Legend.

The Black Legend is the term for the propaganda that asserted (and asserts today) that Spain, and the Spanish peoples who settled and inhabited much of the Americas were uniquely evil, and were uniquely and cruelly associated with slavery, exploitation, and genocide.

So it is also ironic that some 26 Hispanic members of the House voted to endorse the Black Legend—and therefore somewhat stupidly condemning their own forebears and betraying their own heritage. (Republicans David Gallegos and Rod Montoya were the only two representatives of Spanish descent to have the gumption to vote "No.") But we digress.

Uncivilized Conduct has Been the Norm: No Race or Ethnic Group has been Free from it

The reality is that the "indigenous peoples" are, like every other group in the history of anthropology, guilty of the very same "sins" that today's activists cite in attacking the Spanish (or the British, or the French, or Belgians, or anyone else).

In fact, Native American culture under the same microscope of anthropological, archeological, and historical examination, doesn't hold up terribly well.

Native American tribal groups practiced slavery long before the European introduction of African slavery into North America. Additionally, captured warriors, in particular, were often mutilated and tortured. Some Indians did the very thing Oñate is accused of: cutting a foot off their captives to keep them in bondage. Native Americans also sold their slaves to Europeans.

Human sacrifice was widespread in the Americas. In what is now the Eastern U.S., the Iroquois cut the fingers off their captives and forced them to set each other on fire. They dragged bodies of captives around their camps, carved them up, and ate parts of the body.

Cannibalism was fairly common in the New World. Aztecs, who are now revered—and claimed by many Leftist Mexican-American political "leaders" as their "true" ancestors (while they reject their Spanish heritage)—viewed their captives as "marching meat." The word "Mohawk" comes from the Algonquin family of languages as a term for "flesh eaters."

Native Americans were obsessed with the heads of their enemies. Scalping was very common. Deep in the jungles of the Americas, head-hunting and head-shrinking was a big scene. The Mayans famously played a kind of ball game, using a severed head as "the ball."

No More than a Maximum of One or Two People on the House Floor 

Sadly these days, there is not a lot of informed discussion taking place on very many issues in the state house or state senate. Regarding the debate on House Bill 100, if there was anyone at all on the House Floor who actually knew much at all about the subject being discussed it was certainly no more than one or two. 

So, now we are left to celebrate “Indigenous People’s Day”?

 

We are dumping Columbus Day because he led an evil onslaught from Spain? A violent and repressive crowd of Iberians who introduced slavery? To replace it with a day honoring other violent and repressive peoples who introduced slavery even earlier than the Spanish?

 

That notion would be laugh-out-loud funny if it weren't so serious.

 

It isn't funny because it is nothing more than the continued influence of the Left, trying to tear at American society, trying to divide a long-existing unity among the American people, and a sense of oneness and common purpose that had grown incrementally through the many decades of the American Experiment. At least until recent times.

 

The entire Columbus Day v. Indigenous Peoples' Day show is a phony issue—an invented controversy.

 

The history of the entire world, on every continent, is replete with the stories of one group of violent, aggressive peoples invading territory occupied by other violent, aggressive peoples who had previously displaced other human tribes who were themselves violent, aggressive displacers of their fellow human beings.

 

That was long-since true of the Americas eons before Columbus ever thought of coming this direction.

 

Violence, displacement, conquest, and yes, racism and bigotry have been part of EVERY group of human beings that has walked the earth. All these "sins," these original conditions mankind, are universal human frailties.

 

They are historic, anthropological facts—confirming the continuous flaws in the makeup of human beings. They are hardly unique to the Spanish, nor to the Italians (for the shrinking group of people who continue to believe Columbus was Italian).

Overlooking the Key Difference—Lost in All the Nonsense and Grandstanding  

Yes, there was greed, violence, subjugation, and exploitation in the post-Columbian New World. But there are many great things America has today which are gifts from our forebears—an actual inheritance from people like Columbus and many other Europeans.

In addition to their own peculiar flaws, the Europeans also brought literacy, and eventually brought The Enlightenment and classical liberalism.

All those things carried with them the powerful forces of political thought, economic theory, the scientific method, innovation, the power of ideas, and the technological transformation that has come with those additions to the human experience.

Those are all gifts, legacies, and inheritances we would not have, but for the Encounter of 1492. 

Do those who are so vehemently "anti-Columbus," or "anti-Spanish" really want to pretend they wish they lived in the same world that existed before those cultures encountered our native lands here in New Mexico, or in the United States?

Are they really in favor of a New Mexico without the wheel? Would they really be happier living in so-called "native" cultures, environments, and social mores left completely undisturbed for half a millennium?

We doubt it. But then again, we don't really believe they think much about any of these questions.

---

* We have no doubt that Romero's "excuse" would be: "Well, they approved it." Which of course is a strong indictment of the RCLC.

---

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

---

Intelligent Political Discourse—for the Thoughtful New Mexican

 

 

 

The Speaker of the New Mexico House of Representatives forced two controversial bills through late Friday evening by ignoring the rules which protect member’s right to debate. Reducing the 2nd amendment rights of law-abiding New Mexicans is the goal of the two bills passed by House Democrats.

“What happened tonight in the House is exactly why we don’t support these bills,” said Rod Montoya (R-Farmington). “The number of rules or laws don’t matter when there are those who are willing to break them. Only law-abiding citizens will be penalized by these new laws. The Speaker of the House over the last two weeks has routinely broken rules to ignore Republicans questions and to stifle debate."

Among the bills passed on Monday is House Bill 8 (HB 8.) This bill would impose criminal penalties on law-abiding New Mexicans trying to sell or trade their firearms. HB 8 does nothing to address where most criminals receive a gun, which is through theft.

“When it comes to these bills, 29 out of our 33 Sheriffs stand against them because they can’t be enforced and infringe on the due process rights of law abiding New Mexicans,” said House Minority Leader Rep. Jim Townsend (R-Artesia).

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Calls to House Republicans are 90% Opposed to House Bill 51

New Mexico House Republicans are calling on Governor Lujan Grisham to make public the numbers of New Mexicans who have called her office opposing House Bill 51. The radical, full term abortion bill passed out of the House despite bipartisan opposition late Wednesday evening. Since the vote, national media outlets have covered the radical “status quo” of abortion in New Mexico including the practice of allowing elective abortion up to the day of birth even if the child and mother are healthy.

Calls into members of the House Republicans continue to be overwhelmingly opposed to House Bill 51 with 994 total calls received of which 898, or over 90% are opposed.

Constituents are reporting calls to the Governor’s office are being combined into a similar tally. House Republicans are calling on the Governor to release the number of calls that have come to her office on House Bill 51 with a breakdown of how much support and how much opposition to the bill.

“As New Mexicans learn about how the practice of abortion is conducted in New Mexico, they’re outraged,” said Rep. Rachel Black (R-Alamogordo). “We were sent here to represent our constituents and that means we listen when they reach out.”

“Calls into my office overwhelmingly oppose this bill,” said Rep. David Gallegos (R-Eunice). “The people in my district, and all of New Mexico deserve to know if the Governor is listening.”

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

This week, New Mexico House Democrats voted to repeal existing New Mexico law on abortion, which they referred to as "antiquated." 

The debate on House Bill 51 was led by its sponsor, State Representative Joanne Ferrary of Las Cruces, and was purely scripted—the first we have seen.

Ferrary, who may or may not be articulate and informed (it was impossible to tell from the debate) was assisted by three "experts" on abortion, whom she introduced as Ellie Rushforth¹ of the ACLU, Lalita Moskowitz² of the ACLU, and Denicia Cadena³, who describes herself as "a queer Chicana born and raised in Mesilla." Cadena represents Young Women United, which says it is: 

"an organization that leads policy change, research, place-based community organizing, and culture shift by and for women and people of color in New Mexico. Denicia, YWU says, "leads the design and implementation of YWU’schange-making strategies. She works to make sure the voices and expertise of those most impacted by an issue are centered in decision-making spaces. Denicia has deep experience working on issues of reproductive justice, racial justice, and queer justice."*

Ferrary conducted her entire debate (all we have seen anyway) holding a script in her hand, and reading from it, usually haltingly, while stumbling over words, as if the experts had just now handed it to her. She began with a soliloquy, reading from the script about the importance of abortion and maintaining the "status quo" to ensure abortion is available everywhere all the time.

She then yielded to her co-sponsor, Representative Georgene Louis from Albuquerque, who immediately contradicted Ferrary: 

"This is not an aborton bill, but a decriminalization bill..."

After going on about that for a bit and the fact that she was raised in a rural community and that the US government had apparently forced all kinds of unwanted health care on native communities, she yielded the floor back to Ferrary, who immediately went back to talking about how the bill was about abortion, thus contradicting Louis. 

To be fair, Ferrary may not have paid any attention at all to Louis, because Ferrary constantly held a script in her hand and followed it religiously (so to speak). 

Armstrong Weighs In

At that point, the Speaker recognized Representative Deborah Armstrong of Albuquerque, who also had a script, and began reading from it: 

"Um, uh, gentlelady, I'd like to go into a little more uh detail to clear up some misconceptions about this, um, about uh, this uh bill, would uh, would repeal, uh, of this law, so uh, uh, would it leave abortion unregulated?"

Ferrary responded by leaning over her desk and picking up the script, pulling it up to her reading level, and began reading, haltingly:

"Mr. Speaker, um,  Gentlewoman from Bernalillo, uh, no it would not leave um it unregulated. Um, this bill does not change current health care practice. It simply removes antiquated law, um, that criminalizes health care."

Ferrary looked back to her experts and mumbled something, showing them the paper from which she read, apparently wanting to be sure she had referred to the correct portion of the script, or had nailed the answer. We couldn't tell. But it was clear she needed some sort of reassurance, which the women gave by nodding, indicating that she had read from the correct page. 

Meanwhile, the audience had learned that  "health care," which presumably we have all been receiving throughout our lives, has been a crime all this time. Who knew?

Armstrong, then read a question: "Are you aware of uh, um, medical guidelines related to abortion?"

This created confusion as Ferrary shuffled papers, scrambling to find the script, when finally one of the young women experts leaned forward and pointed out the correct answer, giving Ferrary the go-ahead. Thus bolstered, she began reading:

"Mr. Speaker and the gentlewoman from Bernalillo, um, yes, um, like all health care providers, abortion providers continuously work to improve safety in addition to rigorous and ongoing training. Abortion providers are already held to rigorous medical standards evaluation and guidelines based on standards from the New Mexico Medical Board, the New Mexico Nursing Board, the Department of Health, and the New Mexico Board of Pharmacy..."

Ferrary Goes off Script: Reined back In by Handlers Sitting Behind Her

We noted with some amusement that just before 6:31 PM, while reading from another script that had been handed to her, Ferrary apparently began going into parts of the script that the handlers didn't like.

Armstrong had asked about a "religious clause" that might allow healthcare providers to refuse to perform certain acts.

Ferrary began reading from another script: 

"The New Mexico Uniform Healthcare Decisions Act also allows providers and institutions to refuse to comply with a patient's chosen healthcare decisions for reasons of conscience and it applies to all healthcare decisions broadly defined. It is not restricted to those who are terminally ill or in an irreversible coma."  

But then as she got to this point: 

"But additionally, the New Mexico Medical Practices Act codifies the American Medical Association's Code of Ethics, which allows practitioners to refuse to participate in care they find objectionable. When pressed...

Suddenly (as seen in the photo at left) just as she said "When pressed," one of her handlers, Ellie Rushforth, reached up with her left hand and grabbed Ferrary by the behind. As Ferrary turned around, another expert, Denicia Cadena, shook her head and also with her left hand gave the "throat slash" international cut sign—with the hand moving across the throat.

"You're done," she seemed to be saying, "Stop talking."

Ferrary, immediately terminated her remarks, saying "Thank you, Mr. Speaker and gentlelady from Bernalillo."

Back to Armstrong: Would this bill allow Abortion at any Point in the Pregnancy?

So then, Armstrong popped this question:

Would this bill allow abortion at any point in the pregnancy? 

Ferrary responded with this grammatically challenging response. 

"Mr. Speaker and Gentlelady from Bernalillo, abortion is a healthcare and healthcare is not a crime."

Abortion is a healthcare? That sounds like a construct from a non-native speaker of English. But despite its grammatical oddness, it is consistent with the world of euphemism which now dominates all political discourse from the Left.

¹ Elinor Rushforth worked for the Southwest Women’s Law Center, and as an attorney with OneJustice, a California nonprofit that develops policies in response to the needs of vulnerable, targeted communities. She says she works on developing innovative collaborations that will have the effect of transforming communities.

²Lalita Moskowitz is a Staff Attorney and Equal Justice Works Fellow working to expand reproductive health access and family services for incarcerated women in New Mexico. Before she graduated from the University of New Mexico School of Law in 2018, Lalita worked at the ACLU of New Mexico as a legal intern for reproductive rights. Before joining the ACLU, Lalita was a summer law clerk for the McGinn, Carpenter, Montoya, and Love law firm in Albuquerque. During law school, Lalita also taught high school students about civil liberties in her role as a Marshall-Brennan Constitutional Literacy Project Fellow. Before law school, Lalita was a field organizer for Planned Parenthood of New Mexico and served as team leader for AmeriCorps NCCC. Lalita received her Bachelor of Arts from Connecticut College in 2012. 

³ A proud sister, aunt, daughter, and friend–Denicia couldn’t imagine herself without all the strong women and folks that have shaped her. As a former welder and sculptor, Denicia knows that some ways of knowing and understanding can only be expressed through art. Denicia holds a BA in History with a concentration in Diaspora Studies from Amherst College.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.

Democrat women wearing white? Wrong, wrong, wrong! Here’s why that is SO wrong, so VERY wrong:

We found out that the Democrats’ explanation for the white outfits at the State of the Union address Tuesday night is that they were doing it to represent or commemorate women’s suffrage. Now that is incredibly rich—even for the Democrat Party!

NEVER BE A SOCIALIST NATION?

During the State of the Union Address, when President Trump said:

“Tonight we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country,”

“The road to the Democratic Presidential nomination runs through Venezuela.”

                                                                                            — Senator Lindsey Graham, 5 February 2019

The Pope Gets to Speak in the United Arab Emirates

We refuse to join in heaping lavishing bedazzling, effulgent, over-the-top praise on the United Arab Emirates or any other Muslim country for merely allowing the Pope to speak—in other words for doing what any NORMAL country would do.

No one and no nation needs to be praised for merely reaching the absolute minimum level of tolerance.

It is kind of an insult to Muslims that solely because it’s an Islamic country, meeting a minimal level of civilization is viewed as “remarkable."

Seriously? Such an appraisal is the very definition of backwardness.

Democrats Again Limit Public Testimony, Including Testimony from New Mexico Sheriffs

House Democrats on the Judiciary Committee voted unanimously to move forward bills which will strip law-abiding New Mexicans of their 2nd Amendment rights on Monday.

Before voting to advance the bills, House Democrats limited public testimony by requiring everyone to testify on all the bills at once as opposed to listening to the public on each individual bill. The move allowed for less time to hear from the public but allowed House Democrats to pass the bills more quickly.

“When 85% of the Sheriffs across New Mexico say these bills aren’t good for their counties, I believe them,” said Rep. Jim Townsend (R-Artesia).

Among the bills passed on Monday is House Bill 8 (HB 8.) This bill would impose criminal penalties on law-abiding New Mexicans who want to sell or give their firearm to friends or family without a background check.

“We shouldn’t be punishing law-abiding gun owners by passing laws we know criminals won’t follow,” said Rep. Bill Rehm (R-Albuquerque). “Even the expert witness for the Democrats, an Albuquerque Police Detective, stated felons who posses firearms either obtain them by theft or purchase stolen firearms from other criminals,” he continued.

Also passed was House Bill 83 which would allow for the confiscation of a legal gun owner’s firearms when someone in the home, even if it isn’t the gun owner, is designated an emergency risk.

Similar to a previous hearing, a large and bipartisan group of New Mexico Sheriffs testified against the bills.

The bills now head to the House floor.

Email us (at nmpj@dfn.com) with your feedback, comments, questions and ideas.