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

>> Jeff: THIS WEEK ON NEW  MEXICO IN FOCUS, BATTLING BALLOT MISINFORMATION.

SECRETARY OF STATE MAGGIE TOULOUSE OLIVER TELLS US  WHAT PRESIDENT BIDEN DROPPING OUT OF THE RACE  MEANS AND DOESN'T MEAN FOR NEW MEXICO VOTERS.

AND -- >> Goodrich: IT KIND OF  MAKES SENSE THAT COURTS DO INTERPRET THE LAW.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT COMPLEXITY THAT COMES WITH  ISSUES, IN PARTICULAR MY ARENA OF ENVIRONMENTAL  PROTECTION.

>> Jeff: HOPE, AMID THE  DARKNESS.

OUR LAND'S LAURA PASKUS ASKS  A LONGTIME ENVIRONMENTAL ATTORNEY HOW PEOPLE CAN  ADVOCATE FOR CLEAN AIR AND WATER, EVEN AS THE SUPREME  COURT SLASHES PROTECTIONS.

NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS STARTS  NOW.

THANKS FOR JOINING US THIS  WEEK, I'M EXECUTIVE PRODUCER JEFF PROCTOR.

WE HAVE A PACKED SHOW.

ERIK SCHLENKER-GOODRICH OF  THE WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER TALKS WITH OUR  LAND'S SENIOR PRODUCER LAURA PASKUS ABOUT THE TROUBLING  POLITICS OF PROTECTING OUR AIR, LAND, AND WATER.

AND WHY THERE'S STILL HOPE.

IN LESS THAN 30 MINUTES, I  SIT DOWN WITH PETER SIMONSON TO DISCUSS HOW CIVIL RIGHTS  AND LIBERTIES HAVE SHIFTED IN THE STATE AND THE NATION  DURING HIS 24 YEARS AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT THE  ACLU OF NEW MEXICO.

AND IN THE SECOND HALF OF  TODAY'S SHOW SENIOR PRODUCER LOU DiVIZIO SPEAKS WITH THE  ACTING DIRECTOR OF THE STATE'S OFFICE OF BROADBAND  AND EXPANSION ABOUT A YEAR'S-LONG PROJECT TO  CONNECT EVERY PUBLIC SCHOOL IN NEW MEXICO TO HIGH-SPEED  INTERNET.

BUT FIRST, WE TURN OUR ATTENTION TO THIS FALL'S  GENERAL ELECTION.

SINCE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN  DROPPED OUT OF THE RACE LAST WEEKEND, THE INTERNET HAS  BEEN AWASH IN MISINFORMATION ABOUT HOW BIDEN'S WITHDRAW  AND SUBSEQUENT ENDORSEMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENT KAMALA  HARRIS WILL AFFECT THE NOVEMBER BALLOT.

SECRETARY OF STATE MAGGIE TOULOUSE OLIVER JOINS US  VIRTUALLY THIS WEEK TO CLEAR SOME THINGS UP.

INCLUDING A BREAKDOWN OF WHAT WILL HAPPEN TO BIDEN'S  PLEDGED DELEGATES FROM NEW MEXICO'S JUNE PRIMARY, AND  HOW BEST TO VERIFY INFORMATION ABOUT VOTING  DURING WHAT PROMISES TO BE A CHAOTIC ELECTION CYCLE.

MAGGIE, THANK YOU FOR BEING WITH ME ON NEW MEXICO IN  FOCUS THIS WEEK.

>> Oliver: YEAH, THANKS FOR  HAVING ME, JEFF.

>> Jeff: SO, PRESIDENT JOE  BIDEN WON THE NEW MEXICO DEMOCRATIC PRIMARY IN JUNE,  THEN DROPPED OUT OF THE RACE LAST WEEKEND.

THAT MEANS HIS NAME WON'T BE ON THE BALLOT IN NOVEMBER  AND THAT MEANS DONALD TRUMP AUTOMATICALLY WINS NEW  MEXICO, RIGHT?

>> Oliver: NO.

THAT ISN'T HOW IT'S GOING TO GO.

WHAT FOLKS DON'T NECESSARILY REALIZE IS THAT, YOU KNOW,  PRIMARY ELECTIONS ARE NOMINATIONS.

AND SO, YES, DEMOCRATS IN NEW MEXICO VOTED IN JUNE IN  THE PRIMARY ELECTION WITH JOE BIDEN'S NAME AT THE TOP  OF THE TICKET.

HOWEVER, THAT VOTE I THINK,  YOU KNOW, MUCH LIKE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE IN THE  GENERAL ELECTION, FOLKS DON'T REALLY REALIZE THAT  VOTE IS TO ALLOCATE DELEGATES TO THE DEMOCRATIC  NATIONAL CONVENTION.

THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL  CONVENTION, WHICH OCCURS NEXT MONTH IN AUGUST, IS  WHEN THE BALLOT WILL BE FINALIZED  FOR ALL 50 STATES, INCLUDING NEW MEXICO  IN TERMS OF WHICH CANDIDATE IS GOING TO BE THE  PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.

SO, AS WE'VE SEEN THESE LAST  SEVERAL DAYS, PRESIDENT BIDEN HAS DECLINED TO  CONTINUE HIS CAMPAIGN, HAS ENDORSED VICE-PRESIDENT  KAMALA HARRIS.

SHE IMMEDIATELY WENT ABOUT  TRYING TO GET THOSE DELEGATES THAT HAD BEEN  PLEDGED TO PRESIDENT BIDEN FOR HER CAMPAIGN FOR  PRESIDENT.

AND AS WE ALL KNOW, WITHIN A  VERY QUICK AMOUNT OF TIME, HAD ENOUGH PLEDGED DELEGATES  AT THE CONVENTION TO SECURE THE NOMINATION.

SHE IS THE LIKELY NOMINEE, BUT WON'T OFFICIALLY BE THE  NOMINEE UNTIL THE COMPLETION OF THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL  CONVENTION.

>> Jeff: OKAY.

NOW, I WANT TO UNPACK THAT IN JUST A SECOND.

BUT TO CLEAR UP ONE MORE THING, OBVIOUSLY I WAS  JOKING TO START THE INTERVIEW, BUT YOUR OFFICE,  MAGGIE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, YOUR OFFICE DOES NOT  NEED TO FIRE UP THE POLLS AND HOLD ANOTHER PRIMARY  ELECTION, RIGHT?

>> Oliver: NO, IN FACT  THERE'S NO PROVISION FOR THAT IN STATE LAW.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, THERE'S NO NEED FOR THAT.

BECAUSE, AGAIN, THIS IS A NOMINATION PROCESS.

YOU KNOW, WE HAVEN'T REALLY SEEN THIS ISSUE AT THE  NATIONAL LEVEL VERY OFTEN.

I THINK THE LAST TIME WE SAW  SOMETHING LIKE THIS HAPPEN WAS IN THE '60s WHEN LIKELY  NOMINEE ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR. WAS SADLY ASSASSINATED  AND WAS ULTIMATELY REPLACED ON THE BALLOT BY THE  DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION.

HERE IN NEW MEXICO, MANY CANDIDATES WHO HAVE SOUGHT A  PRIMARY ELECTION NOMINATION AND WON HAVE THEN WITHDRAWN  AFTER THE PRIMARY ELECTION AND WE DO A MINI-VERSION OF  THAT AT THE STATE LEVEL.

WHERE EITHER THE STATEWIDE  CENTRAL COMMITTEE FOR THE DEMOCRATIC OR REPUBLICAN  PARTY, OR THE LOCAL -- THOSE MEMBERS FROM THAT DISTRICT  GET TOGETHER AND CHOOSE A NOMINEE.

IN FACT, WE JUST HAD THAT HAPPEN WITH SENATOR SIAH  CORREA HEMPHILL FROM SILVER CITY WHO WITHDREW AFTER THE  PRIMARY ELECTION, AND THE LOCAL CENTRAL COMMITTEE  MEMBERS FOR THE STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY FROM THAT  DISTRICT HAVE SELECTED REPLACEMENT CANDIDATE.

>> Jeff: GOTCHA.

SO WHERE ARE Y'ALL SEEING  SOME OF THESE WILD INTERPRETATIONS ABOUT WHERE  AND HOW ELECTIONS WORK?

>> Oliver: YOU KNOW, SADLY  FOR YEARS, YOU KNOW WE HAVE BEEN SEEING JUST A  TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF DISINFORMATION,  MISINFORMATION AND MAL INFORMATION ABOUT HOW THE  ELECTION PROCESS WORKS.

YOU KNOW, IT WAS REALLY  PREVALENT IN 2020 AND IT'S ONLY GROWN INCREMENTALLY.

NOW WE'RE SEEING IT IN SUCH A HUGE WAVE,  OF COURSE, IN THIS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION YEAR.

ALL OVER SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU KNOW, PRIMARILY.

SO, UNFORTUNATELY, OR FORTUNATELY, A LOT OF FOLKS  GET THEIR INFORMATION FROM SOCIAL MEDIA.

A LOT OF THAT INFORMATION IS FACTUAL, BUT A LOT OF IT  ISN'T.

RIGHT AWAY ON SUNDAY, WHEN  WE ALL HEARD THAT PRESIDENT BIDEN WAS WITHDRAWING FROM  THE RACE, IMMEDIATELY WE SAW MEMES CIRCULATING AROUND  SAYING THESE ARE THE STATES PAST THE BALLOT DEADLINE,  NEW MEXICO IS INCLUDED ON THAT LIST.

AND I THOUGHT OH, NO, NO, NO WE NEED TO GET THE FACTUAL  INFORMATION OUT THERE.

>> Jeff: WHEN IS THE BALLOT  DEADLINE, MAGGIE, FOR THE  RECORD?

>> Oliver: IT'S AUGUST 27th.

SO, YOU KNOW, THERE'S PLENTY OF TIME FOR THE DEMOCRATS TO  HOLD THEIR CONVENTION, AND FOR THEM TO CERTIFY THAT NEW  NOMINEE TO OUR OFFICE.

>> Jeff: OKAY.

WE'VE KNOWN EACH OTHER FOR A LONG TIME, AND IT SEEMS TO  ME THAT YOUR JOB USED TO BE SIMPLER, IF NOT EASIER.

MOST OF WHAT YOU DID AS BERNALILLO COUNTY CLERK AND  NOW AS SECRETARY OF STATE WAS TO ADMINISTER ELECTIONS.

IT SEEMS THAT THESE DAYS YOU SPEND A FAIR AMOUNT OF TIME  HAVING CONVERSATIONS LIKE THIS IN WHICH YOU HAVE TO  BEAT BACK SOME OF THE MIS AND DISINFORMATION THAT  YOU JUST TALKED ABOUT.

FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, WHEN  AND WHY DID THAT REALLY START TO SHIFT?

>> Oliver: WELL, YOU KNOW, AS YOU'LL REMEMBER, JEFF,  FROM BACK IN THE DAYS WHEN I WAS A COUNTY CLERK AND YOU  WERE AT THE ALBUQUERQUE JOURNAL, THERE HAVE ALWAYS  BEEN RUMORS ABOUT ELECTION ADMINISTRATION AND THAT  WE'VE OCCASIONALLY HAD TO QUASH.

BACK THEN, IT WAS A HANDFUL OF FOLKS.

GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHEN RUMORS OR PROBLEMS AROSE WE  WERE ABLE TO GET THE INFORMATION OUT,  THE CORRECT INFORMATION, OUT QUICKLY TO QUASH THOSE  RUMORS.

FOLKS WHO CONTINUED TO  BELIEVE THEM, YOU KNOW, THOSE WERE SORT OF LIKE THE  BLEEDING EDGES ON EITHER SIDE,  DEPENDING ON WHAT THE ISSUE WAS THAT WAS BEING RAISED.

YOU KNOW, NOW SUCH A TREMENDOUS PERCENTAGE OF THE  POPULOUS HAS BEEN TOLD FOR YEARS TO DISTRUST OUR  ELECTION PROCESS AND HAS BEEN FED SO MANY LIES AND SO  MUCH MISINFORMATION ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE'RE AT A  POINT WHERE FOR THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE SO  CONVINCED THERE'S LITERALLY NOTHING WE CAN SHOW THEM OR  DEMONSTRATE TO THEM THAT WILL CHANGE THEIR MIND.

SO, I'VE ALWAYS FELT AS AN ELECTION ADMINISTRATOR THAT  MY JOB IS NOT JUST TO RUN ELECTIONS BUT TO MAKE SURE  THAT PUBLIC HAS ACCURATE INFORMATION.

YOU KNOW THERE'S A DIALOGUE IN CIVICS AND THE VOTING  PROCESS.

I DO FEEL LIKE THAT IS ONE  OF MY RULES.

BUT TO YOUR POINT, IT HAS  BECOME SUCH A PREVALENT PART OF MY JOB THAT I PROBABLY  DO, I THINK, SPEND THE VAST MAJORITY OF MY TIME AND  ENERGY HAVING THESE CONVERSATIONS TO LET PEOPLE  KNOW, LOOK, THE REALITY IS THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE  THAT WANT TO SOW SEEDS OF DOUBT IN THE PROCESS, HOPING  THAT MAYBE THE PUBLIC WILL GET SO DISCOURAGED THAT THEY  MAY NOT EVEN PARTICIPATE.

THAT'S TRULY UNFORTUNATE.

THAT'S NOT OUR DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM.

IT'S INCUMBENT UPON ME AND MY FELLOW ELECTION OFFICIALS  HERE IN NEW MEXICO, AND ACROSS THE COUNTRY, TO MAKE  SURE THAT FOLKS KNOW WHERE TO GET TRUSTED AND ACCURATE  INFORMATION.

I'LL SAY IT RIGHT NOW, YOU  KNOW, ANYBODY WHO HAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHERE, WHEN,  AND HOW THEY CAN VOTE, OR HOW AN ELECTION PROCESS  WORKS, DON'T GO ANYWHERE ELSE BUT YOUR SECRETARY OF  STATE OR YOUR LOCAL COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE.

THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO GET THAT TRUSTED, ACCURATE  INFORMATION.

>> Jeff: MAGGIE, YOU JUST  ANSWERED MY LAST QUESTION.

I REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE  THE SOLID INFORMATION AND THE CONVERSATION, AS ALWAYS.

THANKS FOR HELPING PEOPLE NOT BE LED ASTRAY ON  ELECTION DAY.

>> Oliver: THANK YOU SO  MUCH, JEFF, TOO.

>> Jeff: THANKS.

>> Simonson: I WOULD SAY THAT'S PROBABLY BEEN THE  MAJOR CHANGE FOR US IS SEEING HOW THE FEDERAL  COURTS HAVE BECOME SUCH A DIFFICULT PLACE TO PURSUE  CIVIL RIGHTS CLAIMS.

EITHER ON AN INDIVIDUAL  BASIS OR AN A MORE SYSTEMIC BASIS.

NOW, LOOKING TO THE STATE COURTS TO TRY TO TAKE OVER  SOME OF THAT ROLE.

>> Jeff: EVERYONE LIKES  HAVING CLEAN WATER TO DRINK AND CLEAN AIR TO BREATHE.

YET, BEDROCK ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS ARE  CONTINUOUSLY BEING ERODED IN THE UNITED STATES.

THIS WEEK, OUR LAND'S SENIOR PRODUCER LAURA PASKUS TALKED  WITH WESTERN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER EXECUTIVE  DIRECTOR ERIK SCHLENKER-GOODRICH ABOUT A  RECENT BLOW THE SUPREME COURT DEALT TO ENVIRONMENTAL  OVERSIGHT.

THEY ALSO TALK ABOUT PROJECT  2025 AND LOOK AHEAD TO THE UPCOMING PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTION.

AND YOU'LL WANT TO STAY  TUNED FOR THIS, THEY TALK ABOUT OPTIMISM AND THE  AGENCY PEOPLE HAVE TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY AND TO  BUILD A BETTER WORLD TOGETHER.

>> Laura: ERIK, WELCOME.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE AGAIN.

>> Goodrich: MY PLEASURE.

>> Laura: SO IN JUNE, THE  SUPREME COURT STRUCK DOWN THE CHEVRON DOCTRINE.

FIRST, TO START, WHAT WAS THAT?

>> Goodrich: THE CHEVRON DOCTRINE IS A 40-YEAR-OLD  PRECEDENT THAT NO LONGER EXISTS.

CHEVRON REALLY DOESN'T REFER TO THE OIL AND GAS COMPANY,  IT REFERS TO A JUDICIAL DOCTRINE.

THAT JUDICIAL DOCTRINE STANDS FOR A BASIC  PROPOSITION.

THAT WHEN CONGRESS PASSES A  LAW AND COURTS ARE INTERPRETING THAT LAW, THEY  WILL DEFER TO AN AGENCY INTERPRETATION AND  APPLICATION OF THAT LAW, IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF  AMBIGUITY, OR IF THE LAW IS STRUCTURED IN A WAY TO  ADDRESS COMPLEXITY IN THE WORLD.

FOR EXAMPLE, CLIMATE CHANGE, OR AIR QUALITY REGULATION,  OR WORKER SAFETY, PUBLIC HEALTH PROTECTION.

IT'S BASICALLY THE IDEA THAT COURTS ARE NOT WELL-SITUATED  TO WORK THROUGH VERY COMPLEX TECHNICAL ISSUES, SO WE  SHOULD RELY ON ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES WHO  HAVE SCIENTISTS AND ECONOMISTS AND OTHER  TECHNICAL EXPERTS AND LAWYERS AND REALLY  UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR MISSION IS IN THE WORLD, SO  THEY CAN MEET THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

AND WITH THE CHEVRON DOCTRINE, THE CHEVRON  DOCTRINE IS NO LONGER IN EXISTENCE BECAUSE OF A  RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISION, LOPER BRIGHT AND  RELENTLESS, ACTUALLY TWO CASES THAT WERE  CONSOLIDATED.

AND WHAT THE COURT DID IS IT  OVERTURNED THAT 40 YEARS OF PRECEDENT AND IT BASICALLY  SAID COURTS WILL INTERPRET THE LAW.

>> Laura: SO, HOW DOES THAT PLAY OUT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL  ISSUES, AND MAYBE SPECIFICALLY HERE IN NEW  MEXICO?

>> Goodrich: AT ONE LEVEL,  WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT LOPER BRIGHT AND RELENTLESS, THESE  TWO DECISIONS, IT KIND OF MAKES SENSE THAT COURTS DO  INTERPRET THE LAW.

THE PROBLEM IS THAT  COMPLEXITY THAT COMES WITH ISSUES, IN PARTICULAR, MY  ARENA OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

AND WHAT CHEVRON WAS -- THE CHEVRON DOCTRINE WAS SAYING  WELL, WE INTERPRET THE LAW BUT WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE  THESE COMPLEXITIES IN THE WORLD.

THEREFORE, WE'RE GOING TO DEFER TO THE AGENCIES.

THE COURTS WERE EXERCISING THAT JUDICIAL AUTHORITY.

THE CHALLENGE NOW IS THAT COURTS ARE USURPING THAT  AUTHORITY AND AGGREGATING POWER TO THEMSELVES TO  DECIDE HOW LAWS SHOULD BE APPLIED.

WITH ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS, THIS IS PARTICULARLY  IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE BEDROCK ENVIRONMENTAL LAWS  THAT OUR COUNTRY RELIES ON THAT ARE VERY RELEVANT TO  NEW MEXICO, YOU THINK ABOUT THE CLEAN WATER ACT IN  PARTICULAR, THE CLEAN AIR ACT, NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL  POLICY ACT.

THESE LAWS WERE PASSED IN  THE 1970s WITH THE RECOGNITION THAT WE DON'T  KNOW EVERYTHING RIGHT NOW.

WE DO KNOW THERE ARE  PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD AND WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB  BALANCING ECONOMIC INTERESTS WITH PUBLIC HEALTH AND  ENVIRONMENTAL INTERESTS.

SO, WE'RE GOING TO GIVE THE  AGENCIES LOTS OF AUTHORITY.

WHAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS  SAID IS WE DON'T REALLY LIKE THAT.

IT'S THE IMPOSITION OF IDEOLOGY AND USURPING POWER  NOT JUST FROM THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH BUT FROM CONGRESS  BECAUSE THEY'RE BASICALLY SAYING ALL THOSE CAPACIOUS  LAWS, THE EXPANSIVE, BIG VISIONARY LAWS, WE DON'T  REALLY LIKE THEM.

SO WE'RE GOING TO HEM IN ON  THAT AUTHORITY AND WE'RE GOING TO IMPOSE OUR  SUBJECTIVE JUDGMENT ABOUT WHAT THESE LAWS MEANS AND  WHAT THEIR IMPLICATIONS ARE TO THE WORLD AROUND US.

WHAT ARE THE VALUES OF THE RIGHT-WING SUPREME COURT?

IT'S THE ELEVATION OF ECONOMIC INTERESTS OVER THE  PUBLIC INTEREST.

AND THAT'S THE FUNDAMENTAL  THING TO UNDERSTAND HERE.

THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL  NUANCE.

THERE'S A LOT OF LEGAL  SUBTEXT.

ULTIMATELY, LOPER BRIGHT,  RELENTLESS, THE SUPREME COURT'S ACTION IT'S A  FUNCTION OF POWER.

NOT SO MUCH OF LEGAL  ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION FROM, SAY, AN OBJECTIVE  LAWYERLY PERSPECTIVE.

>> Laura: RIGHT.

SO, OKAY.

OKAY, SO IT'S AS BAD AS I  THOUGHT.

>> Goodrich: IT'S VERY BAD.

WHEN YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE LEGAL REASONING, THERE'S  ARGUMENTS THAT SAY, WELL, WHAT THE COURT IS DOING HERE  IS THEY'RE JUST MAKING SURE THAT, HEY, WE'RE THE ONES  THAT HAVE THE EXPERTISE ON UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE WORDS  IN A PARTICULAR LAW MEANS.

THE CHALLENGE IS YOU HAVE  FACTS.

AND COURTS ARE NOT  WELL-SITUATED TO RESOLVE THOSE FACTS.

AGENCIES ARE.

YOU TAKE A SITUATION LIKE  WATER QUALITY PROTECTION.

HOW DO YOU PROTECT WATER  QUALITY?

HOW DO YOU PROTECT EPHEMERAL  STREAMS?

HOW DO YOU PROTECT PLAYA  LAKES?

HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT  POLLUTION DOESN'T HARM FISH?

HOW DO YOU ENSURE THAT IT  DOESN'T HARM PEOPLE WHO SWIM IN THE WATER?

COURTS AREN'T WELL-SITUATED TO DEAL WITH THAT.

SO, NOW WHAT YOU HAVE IS COURTS VERY FRANKLY, I  THINK, SAYING THAT, WELL NO THIS IS OUR POWER, BUT WHEN  YOU LOOK AT THAT EXERCISE OF POWER, AGAIN IT IS ELEVATING  THOSE ECONOMIC INTERESTS.

I THINK WHAT HAPPENS  ULTIMATELY IS THIS COMES AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PUBLIC  INTEREST.

THAT WILL CAUSE GRAVE HARM  TO NEW MEXICO ACROSS ALL ARENAS FROM PUBLIC HEALTH  AND SAFETY TO ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION TO CLIMATE  ACTION, WORKER SAFETY.

>> Laura: YEAH, SPEAKING OF  POWER, WE'VE GOT A PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION COMING  UP.

YOU AND I ARE TALKING ON  WEDNESDAY, THIS WILL AIR ON FRIDAY.

WHO KNOWS?

THE WAY THINGS ARE MOVING SO  FAST.

WHAT'S AT STAKE IN A  PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WHEN IT COMES TO THE ENVIRONMENT  AND CLIMATE ACTION, IN PARTICULAR?

>> Goodrich: AN IMMENSE AMOUNT.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT CLIMATE ACTION SPECIFICALLY, DURING  THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION THE CONGRESS PASSED THE  INFLATION REDUCTION ACT WHICH IS THE LARGEST CLIMATE  INVESTMENT BY A COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD.

THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION WILL HAVE CONSIDERABLE AUTHORITY  ON WHAT ARE THE CONTOURS OF HOW THAT IS IMPLEMENTED.

HOW EFFECTIVE IT WILL BE.

IT'S VERY CLEAR TO ME THAT  KAMALA HARRIS IS VERY MUCH PRO CLIMATE ACTION, AND  DONALD TRUMP IS VERY MUCH ANTI CLIMATE ACTION.

SO THAT EXECUTIVE AUTHORITY ALLOWS THEM TO EITHER  SUBVERT THE LAW OR TO AMPLIFY THE LAW THROUGH  THEIR EXECUTIVE POWER.

NOW, WITH THE SUPREME COURT  IN PLACE, THAT'S SOMETHING CRITICAL TO KEEP IN MIND.

BECAUSE IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT THE NEXT PRESIDENT WILL  CHOOSE JUSTICES TO THE SUPREME COURT.

THEY'RE ELDERLY PEOPLE.

SO SOMETIMES THEY GET ILL,  SOMETIMES THEY DECIDE TO STEP ASIDE.

WITH THE NEXT ADMINISTRATION, THAT NEXT  PRESIDENT WILL LIKELY CHOOSE NEW SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

SO, THE COURT'S STRUCTURE AND POWER AND HOW THEY THINK  ABOUT THE WORLD, THAT IS ALSO VERY MUCH ON THE  AGENDA.

AND SOMETHING THAT I HOPE  VOTERS REALLY THINK ABOUT VERY, VERY CAREFULLY.

AND STEPPING BACK TO THE LOPER BRIGHT DECISION AND  THE OVERTURNING OF CHEVRON, I THINK THAT WHAT I'VE SEEN  AS A LEGAL PRACTITIONER, AS SOMEBODY WHO'S LITIGATED FOR  A QUARTER-CENTURY, I APPROACH THIS WITH THE  VALUES OF WE NEED TO ELEVATE THE PUBLIC INTEREST, NOT  PURELY ECONOMIC INTERESTS.

OF COURSE ECONOMICS ARE PART  OF THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

BUT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT  THE SUPREME COURT BECAUSE THE JUSTICES ON THE SUPREME  COURT, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE CONSERVATIVE, I THINK  THEY'RE RIGHT-WING IDEOLOGUES.

THE MAJORITY THAT'S ON THE COURT.

PARTICULARLY, WHEN YOU THINK OF FOLKS LIKE JUSTICE  THOMAS, AND JUSTICE ALITO.

JUSTICE THOMAS IN  PARTICULAR, AS PROPUBLICA HAS VERY WELL DOCUMENTED, IS  ETHICALLY COMPROMISED.

HANGS OUT WITH BILLIONAIRES  LIKE HARLAN CROW, KOCH BROTHERS, LEONARD LEO OF THE  FEDERALIST SOCIETY.

THESE ARE FOLKS THAT ARE  ACTIVELY TRYING TO ENGINEER SOCIETY THROUGH THEIR VISION  AND THROUGH THEIR VALUES.

AND THAT'S VERY MUCH A  RIGHT-WING VISION, IT'S NOT A CONSERVATIVE VISION IN MY  OPINION.

>> Laura: YEAH, SPEAKING OF  THAT RIGHT-WING VISION, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION HAS  RELEASED IN THE PAST THIS PROJECT 2025 WHICH IS A  MANDATE FOR CONSERVATIVE LEADERSHIP.

IT'S LIKE SIX OR NINE HUNDRED PAGES LONG.

>> Goodrich: NINE HUNDRED PAGES.

>> Laura: NINE HUNDRED PAGES LONG.

THERE IS A LOT FOR ALARM WITHIN THAT DOCUMENT.

ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR ON THE ENVIRONMENT THAT JUMPS  OUT AT YOU IN TERMS OF A  VISION FOR THE FUTURE?

>> Goodrich: JUST AS BROAD  CONTEXT, THIS IS SORT OF A FANTASY FOR RIGHT-WING  THINKERS, LEGAL SHOPS, LIKE THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION TO  REMAKE SOCIETY AND TO REMAKE GOVERNMENT, IN PARTICULAR.

REALLOCATING HOW POWER ACTUALLY WORKS IN OUR  COUNTRY.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE  BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

WITH THE ENVIRONMENT, WHAT I  WOULD HIGHLIGHT IS PUBLIC LANDS.

WHAT THEY WANTED TO DO IS ESSENTIALLY OPEN UP PUBLIC  LANDS TO EXTRACTIVE INTERESTS.

A LOT OF PUBLIC LANDS ARE ALREADY OPENED TO EXTRACTIVE  INTERESTS.

IT'S VERY MUCH OUT OF  BALANCE.

THERE'S A LOT OF RECKLESS,  IRRESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ALREADY OCCURRING.

THEY WOULD AMPLIFY THAT RECKLESS DEVELOPMENT.

THEY WOULD BASICALLY TAKE PUBLIC LANDS, WHICH  OSTENSIBLY ARE STEWARDED FOR THE BENEFIT FOR ALL OF US,  FOR YOU, FOR ME, FOR ALL OF OUR LISTENERS TODAY, AND  THEY WOULD SAY NO, WE'RE GOING TO ELEVATE THE POWER  OF EXTRACTIVE COMPANIES, HARD ROCK MINING COMPANIES,  OIL AND GAS COMPANIES.

FOLKS WHO ARE EXTRACTING  VALUE FROM PUBLIC LANDS, RATHER THAN STEWARDING AND  CONSERVING PUBLIC LANDS.

I THINK THAT IS A VERY  DANGEROUS THING.

I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE  POLLING, WESTERNERS ARE VERY MUCH IN FAVOR OF PROTECTING  PUBLIC LANDS.

WHY?

BECAUSE THEY'RE ONE OF THE REASONS WE LIVE HERE.

WE LOVE OUR PUBLIC LANDS.

I LIVE IN NORTHERN NEW  MEXICO, A PLACE THAT I LOVE AND ADORE.

YOU THINK OF THE RIO GRANDE DEL NORTE NATIONAL MONUMENT,  OR THE VALLE VIDAL.

THOSE ARE PLACES THAT  PROJECT 2025 WOULD TRY TO PUT ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK.

WHETHER THEY SUCCEED OR NOT IS CONTINGENT ON WHAT VOTERS  CHOOSE IN NOVEMBER.

>> Laura: YEAH.

PROJECT 2025, ANYBODY CAN READ THAT ONLINE.

IT'S LIKE THIS BIG, SWEEPING, DETAILED DOCUMENT.

I'M CURIOUS THOUGH, WHAT ABOUT THE CONVERSATIONS THAT  HAPPEN BEHIND CLOSED DOORS THAT WE'RE NOT HEARING  ABOUT?

DO YOU THINK ALL THE  STRATEGIES ARE OUT THERE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION  AND DEREGULATION?

OR ARE THERE OTHER THINGS  THAT WE NEED TO WORRY ABOUT THAT MAYBE DON'T MAKE THE  HEADLINES OR THE INTERNET?

>> Goodrich: THERE'S A LOT  OF ACTIVE WORK BEHIND THE SCENES BASICALLY AMONG  ANYBODY WHO IS ENGAGED IN POLITICS OR ANYBODY WHO'S IN  ENGAGED IN ADVOCACY RIGHT NOW.

WE LIVE IN THIS WORLD RIGHT NOW WHERE 2025 THERE ARE TWO  PATHWAYS.

THERE IS ONE WHERE KAMALA  HARRIS IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND ONE  WHERE DONALD TRUMP IS.

AND EVERYBODY IS TRYING TO  UNDERSTAND WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS DEPENDING UPON  THAT CHOICE THAT VOTERS MAKE.

WHAT I WOULD SAY RELATIVE TO RIGHT-WING INTERESTS IS THAT  IN THE FIRST TRUMP ADMINISTRATION I DON'T THINK  THERE WAS AN EXPECTATION THAT TRUMP WOULD WIN.

SO, THEY WERE CAUGHT VERY FLAT-FOOTED WHEN SUDDENLY  THEY REALIZED OH, WE'VE WON WHAT DO WE DO NOW.

THAT IS NOT THE SITUATION WITH THIS NOVEMBER.

THE PROJECT 2025 VERY MUCH IS THE BLUEPRINT FOR WHAT A  NEXT REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION WOULD DO.

PRESIDENT TRUMP HAS TRIED TO DISASSOCIATE HIMSELF FROM  PROJECT 2025, HERITAGE FOUNDATION ISN'T PART OF THE  CAMPAIGN, BUT THEN AT THE SAME TIME THAT DOCUMENT WAS  WRITTEN BY VARIOUS FOLKS WHO WILL LIKELY POPULATE A TRUMP  ADMINISTRATION.

SO, I THINK IT'S VERY FAIR  TO SAY THAT PROJECT 2025 IS THAT RIGHT-WING BLUEPRINT.

IT IS VERY WELL-DEVELOPED AND THEY WILL RUN WITH IT  FROM DAY ONE.

>> Laura: YEAH.

I, LIKE YOU, HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THESE ISSUE FOR A  LONG TIME.

I HAVE FRIENDS WHO HELP ME  FIND HOPE AND GIVING ME BOOKS LIKE THIS.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE READ THIS.

ALL THAT WE CAN SAVE.

BUT I WAS READING IT AND  THERE'S A CHAPTER CALLED LITIGATING IN A TIME OF  CRISIS THAT ACTUALLY MADE ME THINK OF YOU.

AND ABIGAIL DILLEN STARTS HER ESSAY, WATCHING CLIMATE  CHANGE PROGRESS IS LIKE LIVING IN A DREAM WHERE  RUNNING IS REQUIRED BUT THE REFLEXES ARE GONE.

EVEN AS LIFE GOES ON IN FAMILIAR WAYS, THE FAMILIAR  HAS BECOME UNRELIABLE.

I'M WONDERING IF THAT  RESONATES WITH YOU AT ALL?

>> Goodrich: IT DOES.

ABBY IS A FRIEND OF MINE.

I KNOW HER WELL.

SHE'S THE PRESIDENT OF EARTH JUSTICE.

WE'VE TALKED FREQUENTLY.

IT DOES.

IN A WEIRD WAY, I FEEL A LOT OF POSITIVITY IN THIS  MOMENT.

I FEEL VERY ENERGIZED.

THERE'S A DYNAMIC OF HAVING THE PRIVILEGE AND THE HONOR  OF LIVING THIS MOMENT IN THE WORLD AND HAVING A SENSE OF  AGENCY THAT I CAN CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY.

YOU KNOW, THE TEAM THAT I WORK WITH AT THE WESTERN  ENVIRONMENTAL LAW CENTER, WE'VE HAD IMMENSE  DEMONSTRATED SUCCESS.

I THINK IN TERMS OF  POSITIVITY, IN TERMS OF HOPE, THE LITIGATION THAT WE  DID IN MONTANA ON BEHALF OF MONTANA YOUTH IN THE HELD V.  MONTANA TRIAL, WHERE WE ESTABLISHED IN MONTANA A  CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A CLEAN AND HEALTHY  ENVIRONMENT.

THAT'S FANTASTIC.

AND THAT'S KIDS RISING TO THE OCCASION AND RISING INTO  LEADERSHIP LEVELS TO CHANGE THE COURSE OF HISTORY.

I WOULD ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO THINK ABOUT WHAT KIND OF  AGENCY THEY HAVE AS INDIVIDUALS.

HOW THEY SHOW UP IN THE WORLD, AND TO CONTRIBUTE TO  THE COURSE OF HISTORY.

WE ALL HAVE AGENCY IN THAT  SITUATION.

WHETHER IT'S SIMPLY GOING TO  THE VOTING BOOTH, WHETHER IT'S DOING WHAT I DO  PROFESSIONALLY, WHERE I HAVE THIS PRIVILEGE OF LEADING A  PUBLIC INTEREST ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY  ORGANIZATION.

WHETHER YOU'RE A REPORTER  WHO CAN LOOK INTO AND DIG DEEP INTO THESE ISSUES AND  UNDERSTANDS HOW IT IMPACTS PEOPLE.

I ALMOST THINK -- BILL MCKIBBEN , I THINK, HAD A  FAMOUS LINE.

I'M PARAPHRASING IT  SLIGHTLY, I DON'T HAVE TIME TO BE DISCOURAGED OR WORRY  ABOUT HOPE, THERE'S SIMPLY TOO MUCH TO DO.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO.

IS TO LEAN INTO WHAT THEY CAN DO AND TO FOSTER A SENSE  OF BELONGING AMONG PEOPLE SO THAT WE HAVE A SHARED SENSE  OF IDENTITY, THAT WE HAVE A SHARED SENSE OF THE  TRAJECTORY OF HOW WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT OUR COMMUNITIES,  HOW WE WANT TO THINK ABOUT OUR RELATIONSHIP TO EACH  OTHER, TO OUR GOVERNMENT, AND TO THE WORLD AROUND US.

I FIND A LOT OF HOPE IN THINKING ABOUT THAT AGENCY  AND HOW WE FOSTER A SENSE OF BELONGING WITH EACH OTHER.

>> Laura: YEAH.

>> Goodrich: WE REFER IT TO  IT INTERNALLY AT MY ORGANIZATION AS AN ECOLOGY  OF KINSHIP.

SO, THINKING ABOUT HOW WE  ADVANCE STRATEGIES THAT -- WE DO A LOT OF VERY WONKY  TECHNICAL AND POLICY WORK, WE DO LITIGATION ON BEHALF  OF NEARLY 200 ORGANIZATIONS.

ULTIMATELY, WHAT WE THINK  ABOUT IS HOW DO WE FOSTER AN ECOLOGY KINSHIP WHICH IS  GOOD, RIGHT, HEALTHY RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH  OTHER AND THE WORLD AROUND US.

>> Laura: I LOVE IT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING  IN TODAY.

I APPRECIATE IT.

>> Goodrich: MY PLEASURE.

I APPRECIATE THE  OPPORTUNITY.

>> Lovelace: SO ANYTHING  ELSE, THE PANDEMIC SHOWED US HOW INTEGRAL THE INTERNET IS  INTO OUR DAILY LIVES AND WHERE TECHNOLOGY IS TAKING  US.

SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF  DISCUSSIONS HAPPEN AROUND THE INTERNET OF THINGS.

OUR REFRIGERATORS, OUR STOVES ARE NOW CONNECTED TO  THE INTERNET.

WE HAVE, YOU KNOW,  INCREASING NUMBER OF DEVICES IN OUR POCKETS AND IN OUR  HOMES THAT ARE GETTING THERE,  AS WELL AS IN THE SCHOOLS.

>> Jeff: THAT INTERVIEW WITH  DREW LOVELACE WILL AIR IN LESS THAN 20 MINUTES.

PETER SIMONSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE ACLU OF NEW  MEXICO, HAS SEEN A WHIRLWIND OF CHANGES SINCE HE BEGAN  HIS CAREER AT THE NONPROFIT NEARLY A QUARTER-CENTURY  AGO.

OVER THE LAST TWO DECADES AS  A JOURNALIST, I'VE HAD COUNTLESS CONVERSATIONS WITH  PETER ABOUT CIVIL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES IN NEW MEXICO AND  ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

THIS WEEK, WE TOOK THAT  CONVERSATION TO THE STUDIO.

IN THE FIRST OF A TWO-PART  INTERVIEW, PETER LOOKS BACK AT THE EARLY DAYS OF HIS  CAREER.

AND I ASK HIM ABOUT THE  CHALLENGES STILL FACING ALBUQUERQUE AND NEW MEXICO  AS HIS ORGANIZATION AND OTHERS WORK TO ENSURE THAT  THE CONSTITUTION IS MORE THAN JUST WORDS ON AN OLD  PIECE OF PARCHMENT.

PETER, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR  JOINING ME ON NEW MEXICO IN FOCUS.

>> Simonson: I'M SO HAPPY TO BE HERE.

THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME.

>> Jeff: ABSOLUTELY.

YOU STARTED AT THE ACLU OF NEW MEXICO A LITTLE LESS  THAN 24 YEARS AGO.

SO I'D LIKE TO BEGIN BY  ASKING WHAT WERE THE BIG ISSUES DRIVING THE ADVOCACY  WORK OF THE ORGANIZATION IN THOSE FIRST FEW YEARS FOR  YOU?

>> Simonson: WELL, YOU KNOW,  FOR ME JUST THAT FIRST YEAR WAS JUST LEARNING HOW TO DO  THE JOB.

IT WASN'T ALL THAT LONG  AFTER THAT OF COURSE SEPTEMBER 11th HAPPENED.

THE WORLD CHANGED.

OUR ORGANIZATION CHANGED.

YOU KNOW, I REMEMBER WE HAD A NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AT  THE NATIONAL OFFICE WHO IS STILL OUR EXECUTIVE  DIRECTOR, ANTHONY ROMERO.

ALL THOSE FOLKS AT THE  NATIONAL OFFICE WERE WORKING FROM THEIR HOMES TRYING TO  FIGURE OUT HOW THEY WERE GOING TO MAINTAIN THE  ORGANIZATION AND HELP THE STATE AFFILIATES RESPOND TO  THE SITUATION THAT WAS UNFOLDING.

A LOT OF THE WORK THEN WAS JUST EDUCATING THE PUBLIC  ABOUT THE THREATS THAT THE USA PATRIOT ACT REPRESENTED,  AND THE HOMELAND SECURITY ACT AFTER THAT AND, THE  VARIOUS PIECES OF LEGISLATION AROUND  ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE.

SO MUCH OF THE COUNTRY WAS  SO FOCUSED ON NATIONAL SCENE, AND NOT JUST, OF  COURSE, THE SORT OF SURVEILLANCE QUESTIONS THAT  WERE HAPPENING IN THE COUNTRY ITSELF, BUT THEN  EVERYTHING THAT WAS HAPPENING OVERSEAS.

AND THE BREAKING OF THE NEWS  THAT THERE WAS THIS TORTURE PROGRAM AND OVERSEAS PRISONS  LIKE ABU GHRAIB.

>> Jeff: BLACK SITES.

CIA BLACK SITES.

>> Simonson: EXACTLY.

AND YOU KNOW THE ACLU IS INSTRUMENTAL IN AIRING ALL  THE DOCUMENTS THAT SHOWED THAT WE CLEARLY HAD THIS  TORTURE PROGRAM AND THAT IT WAS ENDORSED BY THE HIGHEST  LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.

GOING RIGHT UP TO THE  PRESIDENT.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CAN  REMEMBER A LOT OF MY TIME THEN AND WE WERE JUST A VERY  SMALL ORGANIZATION OF THREE, MAYBE FOUR, PEOPLE THAT WAS  GETTING OUT INTO THE COMMUNITY AND ORGANIZING  AROUND THOSE ISSUES.

WE HAD A NUMBER OF CITIES IN  NEW MEXICO THAT PASSED RESOLUTIONS FORMALLY  OPPOSING THE USA PATRIOT ACT.

PRECLUDING THOSE CITIES FROM IMPLEMENTING ANYTHING  SIMILAR, ANY SORT OF SIMILAR SURVEILLANCE LAWS.

THERE'S THAT WORK THAT WAS HAPPENING.

AND THEN THERE WAS WORK HAPPENING IN THE LEGISLATURE  AS WELL.

AS ALWAYS, WE WERE WORKING  ON THE QUESTIONS AROUND EFFORTS TO TRY TO INCREASE  SENTENCING FOR PEOPLE GOING INTO PRISON AND JAIL.

BUT WHAT REALLY STANDS OUT IN MY MEMORY IS RESPONDING  TO THIS JUST SEA CHANGE IN THE COUNTRY AS OUR CONCEPTS,  OUR EXPECTATIONS ABOUT PRIVACY WERE JUST BEING  FUNDAMENTALLY ALTERED BY A GOVERNMENT THAT WAS REALLY  TRYING TO SEIZE SOME AUTHORITIES THAT IT HADN'T  HAD BEFORE.

>> Jeff: YEAH, THE WAR ON  TERROR.

THINKING BACK ON THE RIPPLE  EFFECTS OF THAT, IT'S TERRIFYING TO THIS DAY FOR  ME TO THINK ABOUT.

IT SEEMS TO ME THAT LOT OF  PEOPLE CONCEPTUALIZE OR THINK ABOUT CIVIL RIGHTS AND  LIBERTIES IN THE CONTEXT OF THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, SO  MAYBE LET'S START THERE A LITTLE BIT FIRST.

HOW HAS THE LANDSCAPE CHANGED NATIONALLY IN THE  LAST 25 YEARS?

>> Simonson: WELL, THAT'S A  PRETTY WIDE SCOPE OF TIME.

I THINK AS TIME HAS GONE ON  WE'VE REALLY SEEN HOW CHANGES IN THE MAKEUP OF THE  FEDERAL COURTS HAVE MADE THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY, THE  FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM, A MUCH MORE HOSTILE PLACE FOR CIVIL  RIGHTS CASES.

CASES THAT WE TYPICALLY  WOULD BRING.

AND ALSO SORT OF, IN TERMS  OF LEGAL DOCTRINE, LIKE THE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY DOCTRINE  HAS MADE THAT ALL THAT MORE DIFFICULT FOR CIVIL RIGHTS  PLAINTIFFS TO GET THEIR CASES HEARD BY A JURY OR IN  A BENCH TRIAL OF SOME SORT.

SO, YOU KNOW, AS TIME HAS  GONE ON NATIONALLY AND WE LOCALLY HAVE REALLY STARTED  TO LOOK AT HOW CAN WE BEGIN TO FIND SIMILAR WAYS OF  VINDICATING FOLKS RIGHTS IN THE STATE COURT SYSTEM.

UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

OF COURSE, WE HERE IN NEW MEXICO ARE EXTRAORDINARILY  FORTUNATE TO NOW HAVE A PROVISION IN STATE LAW THAT  ALLOWS A NEW MEXICAN TO GO INTO COURT, CLAIM THAT THE  GOVERNMENT HAS ABUSED THEIR RIGHTS UNDER A STATE  CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION, AND SEEK COMPENSATORY DAMAGE  AND ACTUALLY ATTORNEYS FEES IN TRYING TO VINDICATE THEIR  RIGHTS THAT WAY.

>> Jeff: AND NO QUALIFIED  IMMUNITY UNDER THE STATE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

>> Simonson: EXACTLY.

>> Jeff: I KNOW THAT WAS A  BIG STICKING POINT.

>> Simonson: HUGE.

HUGE.

AND YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU TAKE  A STEP BACK AND YOU LOOK AT SORT OF THE TRACK RECORD OF  QUALIFIED IMMUNITY AROUND THE COUNTRY, I MEAN IT'S  JUST -- SOME OF THE CASES JUST BOGGLE THE IMAGINATION  THAT SEEMINGLY PERFECTLY LEGITIMATE QUESTIONS OF  ABUSE THAT WERE BEING BROUGHT TO THE COURT ARE  TOSSED OUT BECAUSE THE PARTICULAR FACTS DON'T MATCH  THE FACTS OF A PREVIOUS CASE.

SO, I WOULD SAY THAT'S PROBABLY BEEN THE MAJOR  CHANGE FOR US IS SEEING HOW THE FEDERAL COURTS HAVE  BECOME SO -- SUCH A DIFFICULT PLACE TO PURSUE  CIVIL RIGHTS CLAIMS.

EITHER ON AN INDIVIDUAL  BASIS, OR ON A MORE SYSTEMIC BASIS.

AND NOW LOOKING TO THE STATE COURTS TO TRY TO TAKE OVER  SOME OF THAT ROLE.

>> Jeff: THAT'S A GOOD  TRANSITION, ACTUALLY.

I'VE BEEN HAVING  CONVERSATIONS, OF COURSE, WITH YOU AND OTHERS AT THE  ACLU FOR A COUPLE OF DECADES NOW.

AND ONE OF THE THINGS I'VE HEARD WITH MORE FREQUENCY IN  THE LAST HANDFUL OF YEARS IS THAT OUR STATE CONSTITUTION  DOES AFFORD GREATER PROTECTIONS THAN ITS FEDERAL  SIBLING, RIGHT?

HOW SHOULD NEW MEXICANS SORT  OF CONCEPTUALIZE THAT NOTION WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR CIVIL  RIGHT AND LIBERTIES?

>> Simonson: I THINK SOME OF  THAT STORY IS STILL BEING TOLD.

YOU KNOW, WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE NEW MEXICO CIVIL  RIGHTS ACT, WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT WE ARE  GOING TO AND ARE ALREADY STARTING TO SEE MORE AND  MORE CASES BEING FILED UNDER STATE CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS.

AND THAT LAW NOW BEING WRITTEN WHEN IT HAS --  BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT PROVISION IN STATE LAW, IT  HASN'T BEEN USED THE WAY IT COULD BE AND SHOULD BE AND  SHALL BE USED NOW.

YOU KNOW, GENERALLY, FROM  THE LANGUAGE OF IT, AND THE FEW CASES THAT WE'VE BEEN  INVOLVED IN, THE PROVISIONS TEND TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE  EXPANSIVE.

FOR EXAMPLE, ON RELIGIOUS  LIBERTY AND RELIGIOUS ESTABLISHMENT, THAT'S COME  INTO PLAY IN SOME OF THE CASES.

A CASE THAT WAS LITIGATED BY THE ACLU LONG BEFORE I WAS  ACTUALLY INVOLVED WITH THE ORGANIZATION THAT STRUCK  DOWN THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A BERNALILLO COUNTY SEAL  THAT HAD VARIOUS KINDS OF RELIGIOUS SYMBOLISM  INTERTWINED IN IT.

AND YOU KNOW, I DON'T  REMEMBER THE DETAILS OF THAT OPINION, BUT IN MY MEMORY,  PART OF WHAT THAT CASE HUNG ON WAS IN FACT THE VERY  LANGUAGE OF OUR STATE CONSTITUTION.

AND THERE ARE OTHER PLACES IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION  WHERE THAT'S TRUE AS WELL.

WHERE THE DRAFTERS OF OUR  STATE CONSTITUTION SAW WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN THE FEDERAL  CONSTITUTION AND THOUGHT SOMETHING MORE EXPANSIVE  SHOULD APPLY HERE IN THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO.

>> Jeff: YEAH, YOU KNOW I THINK ABOUT SOME OF THE  EARLY POLICE VIOLENCE CASES THAT I WOULD HAVE WRITTEN  ABOUT YEARS AGO, AND LEARNING ABOUT THE FOURTH  AMENDMENT ANALOG IN THE STATE CONSTITUTION AND HOW  IT IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE EXPANSIVE THAN WHAT'S IN THE  U.S. CONSTITUTION.

YOU MENTIONED THE CIVIL  RIGHTS ACT AND YOU'RE WELCOME TO TALK SOME MORE  ABOUT THAT.

I THINK THAT WAS QUITE A  VICTORY FOR THE ACLU.

WHAT HAVE BEEN SOME OF THE  OTHER REALLY BIG ACCOMPLISHMENTS AT THE NEW  MEXICO AFFILIATE IN THE TIME YOU'VE BEEN THERE?

>> Simonson: WELL, I WANT TO SAY FIRST OF ALL NEW MEXICO  CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, WE HAD A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT HAND TO  PLAY IN PASSING THAT LEGISLATION, BUT WE WERE BY  NO MEANS THE ONLY ACTOR IN THAT.

WE HAD LEGISLATIVE CHAMPIONS LIKE BRIAN EGOLF WHO WERE  RIGHT AT THE FOREFRONT OF THAT AND TOOK SOME PRETTY  HEAVY HITS FROM THE MEDIA AND OPPONENTS OF THE  LEGISLATION IN TRYING TO GET THAT ACROSS THE FINISH LINE.

I WANT TO GIVE THEM ALL THE CREDIT THEY DO -- THEY'RE  DUE BECAUSE OUR PART IN IT WAS JUST A PART.

AND THAT'S TRUE OF ALL THE WINS WE'VE HAD OVER THE  YEARS.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A COALITION  EFFORT, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A COLLECTIVE EFFORT WITH OTHER  ALLIES IN THE COMMUNITY.

YOU KNOW, I THINK ABOUT FOR  EXAMPLE, A CASE THAT WAS LITIGATED BEFORE I WAS  ACTUALLY ON WITH THE ORGANIZATION.

NARAL V. JOHNSON, A CASE THAT WAS BROUGHT AGAINST THE  JOHNSON ADMINISTRATION THAT ESTABLISHED THAT HERE IN THE  STATE OF NEW MEXICO STATE MEDICAID FUNDS WILL BE USED  TO PROVIDE ABORTION CARE.

CASES THAT -- ONE OF THE  GREATEST VICTORIES I THINK WE HAD DURING THE TIME I  HAVE BEEN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR WAS THE ACHIEVING THE  FREEDOM TO MARRY FOR SAME-SEX COUPLES IN THIS STATE.

A CASE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO THE STATE SUPREME COURT, BUT  WAS PARALLELED BY AN EDUCATIONAL EFFORT THAT EQNM  AND OTHER ORGANIZATIONS AROUND THE STATE REALLY WENT  TO THE MAT ON AND HELPED TO SHIFT PUBLIC OPINION,  FRANKLY, STATEWIDE THAT I THINK SET THE STAGE FOR  THAT, FOR THE COURT TO RULE THE WAY IT DID.

THAT HAPPENED BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT -- MAYBE  NOT A FULL YEAR, BUT SOMETHING LESS THAN A YEAR  BEFORE THE U.S. SUPREME COURT RULED ON A SIMILAR  QUESTION.

GOSH, YOU KNOW REPEAL OF THE  DEATH PENALTY IN 2009 WAS A HUGE VICTORY.

AGAIN, A BIG COALITION VICTORY.

THERE WAS A SPECIFIC COALITION TO REPEAL THE  DEATH PENALTY THAT LED THAT EFFORT.

MORE RECENTLY, I THINK SOME OF THE REAL VICTORIES WE'VE  SEEN, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE NEW MEXICO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT.

BUT EVEN MORE RECENTLY THAN THAT, PASSING LAWS THAT  SHIELD PEOPLE SEEKING REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH CARE AND  GENDER AFFIRMING CARE FROM MALICIOUS EFFORTS TO  PROSECUTE THEM FROM OTHER STATES THAN OURS.

THAT PROVIDE CERTAIN KINDS OF PRIVACY PROTECTIONS.

THOSE ARE SIGNIFICANT VICTORIES.

AND YOU CAN'T FORGET THAT WE ACTUALLY HAD A LAW ON THE  BOOKS NOT THAT LONG AGO THAT WOULD HAVE MADE ABORTION A  CRIME ONCE DOBBS WAS RULED ON AND ROE WAS OVERTURNED.

AND THROUGH A COALITION EFFORT WE'RE ABLE TO GET  THAT REMOVED FROM THE BOOKS.

REAL CREDIT TO THE FOLKS IN  OUR ORGANIZATION, OUR REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS LAWYERS,  IN PARTICULAR, AS WELL AS OUR OTHER ALLIES IN KNOWING  THAT WAS POSSIBLY A THREAT AND THAT WE GOT THAT TAKEN  CARE OF BEFORE THE COURT EVER -- THE SUPREME COURT  EVER RULED ON DOBBS.

>> Jeff: WHAT RIGHT NOW DO  YOU THINK ARE THE TWO OR THREE BIGGEST CHALLENGES  FROM A CIVIL RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES PERSPECTIVE FACING  ALBUQUERQUE AND NEW MEXICO?

>> Simonson: YOU KNOW, I'VE  BEEN VERY INVOLVED IN EFFORTS TO REFORM THE  ALBUQUERQUE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND MANY FOLKS MAY KNOW THAT THE ALBUQUERQUE POLICE  DEPARTMENT HAS NOW SORT OF ON SUNSETTING ITS CONSENT  DECREE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE.

IT IS TRUE THAT THEY'VE COME INTO COMPLIANCE WITH MANY OF  THE PROVISIONS OF THAT CONSENT DECREE, AND YET FOR  THE TRAINING, FOR ALL THE POLICY CHANGES, FOR ALL THE  IMPROVEMENTS IN THE WAY THAT SPECIAL-TACTICAL UNITS ARE  DEPLOYED, WE STILL SEE A PRETTY HIGH RATE OF USE OF  FORCE THROUGHOUT THE COMMUNITY.

I THINK ONE OF THE UNTOLD QUESTIONS -- ONE OF THE  UNTOLD STORIES AROUND CIVIL RIGHTS FOR ME IS WHAT DOES  IT REALLY TAKE TO FULLY REFORM POLICING IN THIS  COUNTRY TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT PEOPLE DON'T HAVE TO  FEAR THAT IF THEY'RE CALLING THE POLICE ON BEHALF OF ONE  OF THEIR LOVED ONES WHO IS, FOR EXAMPLE, SUFFERING A  MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS, THAT THEY ACTUALLY HAVE TO WORRY  THAT THEY MAY WIND UP BEING SHOT OR THE VICTIM OF SOME  USE OF FORCE.

WE HAVEN'T FIGURED THAT OUT  YET, EITHER IN THIS STATE, EITHER IN THIS CITY OR  NATIONALLY.

I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THE  RIGHT MIX, THE RIGHT CONSTELLATION OF REFORMS HAS  BEEN DISCOVERED YET TO TRANSFORM POLICING.

>> Jeff: I WANT TO ASK A QUESTION ABOUT THAT.

I DON'T WANT TO ASK YOU NECESSARILY WHETHER YOU  THINK THIS TEN-YEAR PROJECT HAS WORKED.

I THINK THAT'S KIND OF A SUCKER QUESTION, ACTUALLY.

BUT I WANT TO ASK WHAT YOU THINK OF THE TOOL.

THE PROCESS THROUGH WHICH THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN  COME IN AND CONDUCT ONE OF THESE BIG INVESTIGATIONS,  THEN GO FORCE YOU IN COURT TO MAKE THESE CHANGES AND  REFORMS.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE  TOOL TEN YEARS INTO THIS?

IS IT AIMED PROPERLY AT WHAT  THE PROBLEM REALLY IS?

>> Simonson: WELL, NO.

I THINK -- I HAVE TWO RESPONSES TO THAT.

THE FIRST WOULD BE I THINK BECAUSE WE REALLY DON'T KNOW  WHAT THE MIX OF REFORMS IS, WHAT THE MIX OF  TRANSFORMATIONS IN POLICING ARE THAT'S ACTUALLY GOING TO  RESULT IN A TRULY CONSTITUTIONAL, TRULY  PROFESSIONAL, TRULY HUMANE POLICING DEPARTMENT, THAT WE  CAN LEAVE THAT OPTION OFF THE TABLE.

THAT WE CAN LEAVE THAT TOOL OFF THE TABLE.

THAT SAID, IT ALSO SEEMS TO ME, FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN,  THAT IT'S CRITICAL THAT WE ARE MOVING AS MANY OF THOSE  RESPONSIBILITIES FOR NEGOTIATING, FOR MANAGING  DANGEROUS CRIMINAL ENCOUNTERS OUT IN THE  PUBLIC, OUT OF THE HANDS OF ARMED OFFICERS AND INTO THE  HANDS OF OTHER PROFESSIONALS WHO ARE BETTER SUITED TO DO  THAT WORK AND WHO AREN'T GOING TO BE ARMED WITH A GUN  AND ARE GOING TO TRY TO SOLVE THE ISSUE AT THE END  OF A FIREARM.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW  OBVIOUSLY, THE CONSENT DECREE DID NOT CREATE THE  ALBUQUERQUE COMMUNITY SAFETY DEPARTMENT.

THAT DEPARTMENT'S HAD ITS ISSUES, HAD ITS STRUGGLES, I  UNDERSTAND.

BUT IT IS HEADED IN THE  RIGHT DIRECTION, IN MY VIEW.

I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO  FUNDAMENTALLY IS REDUCE THE NUMBER OF ENCOUNTERS ON THE  STREET BETWEEN ARMED OFFICERS AND THE PUBLIC.

I THINK ACTUALLY MOST OFFICERS WOULD AGREE WITH  THAT.

I DON'T THINK THEY WANT TO  BE IN THE POSITION OF BEING SOCIAL WORKERS AND SUBSTANCE  ABUSE COUNSELORS, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.

I THINK THAT'S A REALLY IMPORTANT PART OF THE MIX  THAT THE CONSENT DECREE OBVIOUSLY DID NOT REALLY  TOUCH.

ON THE OTHER HAND, YOU CAN'T  DENY THAT IT'S BEEN AN IMPORTANT CHANGE IN THE  DEPARTMENT TO UPGRADE ALL OF THEIR POLICIES, PARTICULARLY  AROUND THE USE OF FORCE.

PARTICULARLY AROUND THE  REQUIREMENTS TO HAVE SOME DEGREE OF MENTAL HEALTH  TRAINING, TO BETTER MANAGE IF NOT PERFECTLY MANAGE  MENTAL HEALTH ENCOUNTERS, MENTAL HEALTH -- PEOPLE IN  MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS.

THOSE KINDS OF SITUATIONS.

BUT SO MUCH MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE.

THE TRAININGS HAVE BEEN IMPORTANT FROM THE  STANDPOINT THAT MAYBE NOW WE HAVE OFFICERS THAT ACTUALLY  WILL STOP AND DE-ESCALATE SITUATIONS BEFORE THEY MOVE  UP ON PEOPLE AND MAKE A SITUATION WHERE FORCE IS  NECESSARY IS UNAVOIDABLE.

>> Jeff: OFFICER-INDUCED  JEOPARDY, IF YOU WILL, RIGHT?

THE POLICE PICK A FIGHT, END IT WITH VIOLENCE, AND THEN  CALL IT SELF-DEFENSE.

>> Simonson: OF COURSE THE  JAMES BOYD INCIDENT WAS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT.

WHERE AN INCIDENT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN ENTIRELY AVOIDED,  WHERE NO ONE HAD TO DIE OR SUFFER INJURY BECAUSE  OFFICERS FORCED THAT SITUATION TO WHERE USE OF  FORCE WAS INEVITABLE.

SOMEONE HAD TO DIE FOR IT.

WE'RE FORTUNATE IN ALBUQUERQUE I THINK OUR  OFFICERS ARE BETTER SITUATED TO MAKE THOSE KINDS OF  DECISIONS NOW THAN MANY OTHER DEPARTMENTS AROUND THE  COUNTRY, BUT IT'S NOT THE MAGIC SOLUTION.

>> Jeff: ANY OTHER THOUGHTS ON BIG CHALLENGES BEFORE WE  TALK SOME ABOUT THE ORGANIZATION?

>> Simonson: THERE ARE BIG CHALLENGES COMING UP.

WE CAN TALK MORE ABOUT THAT BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE AT  A VERY LARGE LEVEL, SOME OF THEM ARE AT A COMMUNITY  LEVEL.

I THINK WE AS AN  ORGANIZATION TRY TO BE AS STRATEGIC AND USE OUR  RESOURCES JUST AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE AND  FOCUSED A WAY AS POSSIBLE.

IT'S NOT BEEN ONE OF OUR  STRATEGIC PRIORITIES TO FOCUS ON THE QUESTION OF  HOMELESSNESS AND THE UNHOUSED COMMUNITY, AND HOW  THEY'RE BEING TREATED OUT IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN.

IT'S BECOMING CLEAR TO ME THAT THAT'S SOMETHING WE'RE  GOING TO HAVE TO ADOPT IN THE NEAR FUTURE BECAUSE NOT  ONLY ARE WE SEEING MORE AND MORE EFFORTS BY STATE AND  LOCAL ENTITIES TRYING TO ESSENTIALLY ENFORCE THOSE  COMMUNITIES OUT OF EXISTENCE, ENFORCE THEM TO  SPACES OUTSIDE CITIES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, BUT THAT  POPULATION IS GOING TO CONTINUE TO GROW.

AND THE PROBLEM IS ONLY GOING TO GET MORE VOLATILE  AS TIME GOES ON.

SO, THAT TO ME IS ONE OF THE  HUGE CHALLENGES.

IT GETS US INTO QUESTIONS  THAT ARE FAR BEYOND THE REALM OF JUST CIVIL RIGHTS  AND CIVIL LIBERTIES BECAUSE NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT  AFFORDABLE HOUSING, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH  SERVICES AND SUBSTANCE USE SERVICES.

LIKE ALL OF YOUR ISSUES, THERE ARE ROOT CAUSES TO THE  THINGS WE OFTENTIMES FOCUS JUST ON THE CIVIL RIGHTS  ASPECT OF, BUT REALLY TO GET AT THE CORE ISSUE, YOU  REALLY DO NEED TO GET TO THE ROOT CAUSES OF THOSE  QUESTIONS.

>> Jeff: I HAVE TO IMAGINE  THAT THIS GRANTS PASS CASE OUT OF OREGON THAT THE  SUPREME COURT JUST DECIDED MAYBE TURBOCHARGES THE  ORGANIZATIONS DESIRE TO GET INTO THAT ISSUE.

>> Simonson: YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY GOING BACK TO  THE NEW MEXICO CIVIL RIGHTS ACT, WE'VE GOT THE GREAT  LUXURY IN THIS STATE NOW OF TRYING TO CONTINUE TO PURSUE  THAT VERY CASE UNDER QUESTIONS THAT ARE  IDENTIFIED BY OUR STATE CONSTITUTION.

BY A SCOPE OF RIGHTS THAT OUR STATE CONSTITUTION HAS  IDENTIFIED FOR ALL OF US NEW MEXICANS.

AND WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE BEHOLDEN TO A  SUPREME COURT THAT HAS SUCH AN EXTREMIST VIEW OF THE  EIGHTH AMENDMENT.

>> Jeff: I'M GRATEFUL TO  PETER SIMONSON FOR SPENDING NEARLY 40 MINUTES IN THE  STUDIO WITH ME.

YOU CAN CATCH PART TWO OF  OUR CONVERSATION ON NEXT WEEK'S SHOW.

EARLIER THIS MONTH, THE NEW MEXICO OFFICE OF BROADBAND  AND EXPANSION LAUNCHED A STATEWIDE EDUCATION NETWORK  PROJECT.

THE $100 MILLION PROGRAM  AIMS TO CONNECT EVERY DISTRICT IN THE STATE AND  THE OFFICE PLANS TO BRING BROADBAND INTERNET ACCESS TO  EVERY PUBLIC AND CHARTER SCHOOL BY 2027.

SENIOR PRODUCER LOU DiVIZIO TALKED LAST MONTH WITH  ACTING DIRECTOR DREW LOVELACE ABOUT THE  CHALLENGES HIS OFFICE HAS FACED WHEN WORKING TO BRING  A STEADY INTERNET CONNECTION TO CLASSROOMS ACROSS THE  STATE.

>> Lou: DREW LOVELACE,  THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING ME HERE ON NEW  MEXICO IN FOCUS.

>> Lovelace: THANK YOU.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE  OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE.

>> Lou: YEAH.

NOW, AS WE'RE SITTING HERE TODAY, YOUR DEPARTMENT IS  WORKING TO CONNECT EVERY PUBLIC SCHOOL IN THE STATE  TO HIGH-SPEED INTERNET.

CAN YOU TELL ME A LITTLE BIT  ABOUT THE ROLLOUT?

HOW MANY SCHOOLS ARE WITHOUT  IT RIGHT NOW AS WE SIT HERE IN LATE JUNE HAVING THIS  CONVERSATION?

>> Lovelace: I THINK IT'S  IMPORTANT TO KNOW THAT HIGH-SPEED INTERNET HAS SOME  DEFINITIONS AROUND IT AS A STARTING PLACE  AND MAKING SURE WE LEVEL SET.

SO, WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S  GIGABIT SERVICE.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE COMMON  SPEEDS YOU MIGHT SEE IN A HOME IS MAYBE LIKE 100  MEGABYTES PER SECOND.

100 MEGABITS PER SECOND.

WE'RE LOOKING FOR GIGABIT.

SO, A THOUSAND, RIGHT?

OR MORE, TO THE SCHOOLS.

AS COMMUNITY ANCHOR  INSTITUTIONS, IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT.

THERE'S A GREAT FEDERAL PROGRAM CALLED E-RATE THAT  HAS BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A LOT OF YEARS.

WE'VE ACTUALLY CONNECTED ALL BUT TWO SCHOOLS AT THIS  POINT WITH FIBER.

FIBER TO THE PREMISE IS ONE  OF THE BIG GOALS OF THE E-RATE PROGRAM.

THOSE LAST TWO SCHOOLS ARE USING A COUPLE OF OTHER  TECHNOLOGIES LIKE SATELLITE, LOW-EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE TO  BE ABLE TO GET THAT HIGH-SPEED SERVICE UP UNTIL  A POINT THEY ACTUALLY GET THE FIBER BUILT OUT TO THE  SCHOOLS.

>> Lou: OKAY, THAT  INFRASTRUCTURE, THE FIBER AND THE SATELLITES, THAT'S  IN PLACE FOR EVERY SCHOOL RIGHT NOW?

>> Lovelace: THAT IS CORRECT.

>> Lou: OKAY.

SO HOW LONG BEFORE THEY ALL  GET THE INTERNET CONNECTED?

>> Lovelace: SO WHAT'S  HAPPENING IN THE DEPARTMENT IS WE'RE ACTUALLY BUILDING  AN INTERCONNECTED RING TO ALL OF THE SCHOOLS.

SO, THEY ACTUALLY CAN GET THE INTERNET RIGHT NOW, BUT  THE STATE EDUCATION NETWORK IS REALLY WHAT THE OFFICE IS  WORKING ON.

AND MAKING SURE THAT THE  SCHOOLS HAVE REDUNDANT PATHWAYS, SO THAT WAY IF A  FIBER IS CUT SOMEWHERE ALONG THE WAY, THAT THEY CAN  ACTUALLY GET SERVICE THROUGH ANOTHER RING THAT GOES OUT  TO A NODE AND BACK OUT TO THE GREATER INTERNET, A  PLACE LIKE ALBUQUERQUE, AND ON TO EL PASO, OR DENVER AND  ONE OF THOSE MAIN WAYS.

THAT WAY THEY HAVE THAT  REDUNDANT CAPACITY IN THERE.

>> Lou: IS THAT NECESSARY  SPECIFICALLY IN A STATE LIKE NEW MEXICO WITH OUR  GEOGRAPHICAL AND -- YEAH GEOGRAPHICAL ISSUES WE HAVE  HERE?

>> Lovelace: YEAH, SO THE  STATE HAS VARIED TERRAIN.

IT MAKES CONNECTIVITY NOT  JUST FOR SCHOOLS, BUT FOR HOMES, EQUALLY AS DIFFICULT.

YOU CAN THINK ABOUT THE GEOGRAPHY ON THE STATE.

ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE STATE WE HAVE A LOT OF LAVA  ROCK, A LOT OF ROCK.

MOUNTAINOUS AREAS IN THE  CENTER PART OF THE STATE.

AND ON THE EASTERN SIDE,  KIND OF THE PLAINS AREAS, RIGHT?

AS FAR AS GETTING THE CONNECTIVITY AROUND THERE,  THERE ARE MANY CONDITIONS IN WHICH FIBER MAY BE CUT, OR  ACCIDENTALLY LOST IN SERVICE, SO HAVING THOSE  REDUNDANT PATHWAYS BUILT AROUND IS INCREDIBLY  IMPORTANT.

ONE OF THE OTHER BIG  ELEMENTS OF THE STATE EDUCATION NETWORK IS MAKING  SURE THAT THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN OF PROCURING THE  INTERNET IS TAKEN OFF OF THE SCHOOLS.

LOT OF THE SCHOOLS HAVE TROUBLE KEEPING I.T.

STAFF,  KEEPING PROCUREMENT STAFF, SO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE  SCHOOLS TO ELECTIVELY OR OPTIONALLY JOIN THE STATE  EDUCATION NETWORK PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STATE  TO TAKE ON THAT ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN FOR  THEM, AND THEIR I.T.

STAFF CAN STAY FOCUSED ON THE  DEVICES IN THE SCHOOLS FOR THE KIDS.

>> Lou: OKAY, THIS MIGHT SEEM LIKE A REALLY SIMPLE  QUESTION, BUT WHY IS HIGH-SPEED INTERNET SO  IMPORTANT SPECIFICALLY FOR SCHOOLS?

>> Lovelace: YEAH, SO I WOULD SAY IT'S IMPORTANT FOR  EVERYBODY, NOT JUST SCHOOLS.

I MEAN, I THINK IF ANYTHING  ELSE THE PANDEMIC SHOWED US HOW INTEGRAL THE INTERNET IS  INTO OUR DAILY LIVES AND WHERE TECHNOLOGY IS TAKING  US.

SO, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF  DISCUSSIONS HAPPEN AROUND THE INTERNET OF THINGS.

YOU KNOW, OUR REFRIGERATORS, OUR STOVES ARE NOW CONNECTED  TO THE INTERNET.

WE HAVE INCREASING NUMBER OF  DEVICES IN OUR POCKETS AND IN OUR HOMES THAT ARE  GETTING THERE, AS WELL AS IN THE SCHOOLS.

THINK ABOUT THE NUMBER OF SMART BOARDS OR EXTRA  LAPTOPS THAT ARE ADMINISTERED.

TESTS THAT ARE BEING TAKEN ONLINE FOR NATIONAL  STANDARDS, OR STATE STANDARDS.

SO, ALL OF THESE THINGS REQUIRE THE INTERNET TO BE  ABLE TO RUN AND OPERATE.

SO, THE INTERNET HAS BECOME  A NECESSITY IN OUR LIVES.

AGAIN, I'LL BROACH IT  FURTHER THAN THE SCHOOLS.

IT'S TELEHEALTH, IT'S THE  EDUCATION PIECES, IT'S ENTERTAINMENT, IT'S  GOVERNMENT SERVICES.

>> Lou: SURE.

NOW, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT THIS NETWORK, THE REDUNDANCY  TO MAKE SURE THAT SCHOOLS ALWAYS HAVE A CONNECTION,  WHEN DO YOU ANTICIPATE THAT THEY PROJECT WILL BE  COMPLETED?

>> Lovelace: THIS HAS BEEN  EIGHT YEARS OF WORK.

SO MY OFFICE IS ABOUT TWO  YEARS OLD.

I WANT TO JUST THANK THE  PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITY AUTHORITY WHICH WAS THE  STARTING ENTITY FOR THIS.

AND WE HAVE TAKEN THIS OVER  IN THE LAST YEAR AND A HALF, OR SO.

BUT IT HAS BEEN EIGHT YEARS OF WORK TO BUILD THESE NODES  AROUND THE STATE.

WE'RE GOING TO TURN THIS UP  JULY 1st OF THIS YEAR.

VERY EXCITING FOR US, WITH A  LOT OF WORK FROM A LOT OF VERY HARD-WORKING STATE  EMPLOYEES THAT HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR A LOT OF  YEARS.

>> Lou: OKAY.

NOW, MOVING AWAY FROM SCHOOLS SPECIFICALLY, WHICH  I KNOW YOU TOUCHED ON A BIT ALREADY, WHICH COMMUNITIES  HAVE BEEN HIT THE HARDEST BY THE LACK OF CONNECTIVITY  THAT WE SEE HERE IN NEW MEXICO, MORE THAN ANY OTHER  STATE?

>> Lovelace: IT'S RURAL  COMMUNITIES.

FROM THE OFFICE PERSPECTIVE,  AND WE HAVE A LOT OF FEDERAL FUNDING THAT'S GOING TO BE  COMING INTO THE STATE OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS TO  MAKE SURE THAT RURAL COMMUNITIES GET CONNECTED.

BUT WE ARE FOCUSED ON THE UNSERVED.

THERE ARE POCKETS JUST OUTSIDE ALBUQUERQUE.

IN THE EAST MOUNTAINS, THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE  STRUGGLING WITH MAYBE OLDER TECHNOLOGY LIKE DSL, AND  THAT MIGHT BE ALL THEY CAN GET.

UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S NOT REALLY ENOUGH TO RUN AND  OPERATE A HOME WITH ALL THE DEVICES WE JUST TALKED ABOUT  COMING ONLINE.

>> Lou: SURE.

WHY HAS THE PROCESS OF  GETTING EVERYONE IN THIS STATE CONNECTED BEEN SO  SLOW?

I KNOW THAT THE BIDEN  ADMINISTRATION IS ISSUING THE STATE SOME FEDERAL GRANT  MONEY.

IS IT JUST A QUESTION OF  MONEY?

>> Lovelace: NO.

IT REALLY ISN'T JUST A QUESTION OF MONEY.

THE REALITY IS THAT IF THE INTERNET WAS EASY TO BUILD  IT WOULD HAVE ALREADY BEEN BUILT.

AND IN A LOT OF WAYS IT WAS.

USING OLD PHONE LINES,  COPPER LINES, TECHNOLOGIES LIKE DSL.

I'M SURE MANY OF THE OLDER WATCHERS MIGHT EVEN THINK  ABOUT THE OLD DIAL-UP TONES, RIGHT?

COMING FROM COMPANIES LIKE AOL OR OTHER DIAL-UP  SERVICES.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AS WE  PROGRESS INTO HIGHER AND HIGHER DEMANDS, WE NEED TO  SCALE THE TECHNOLOGIES TO GO WITH IT.

THERE'S MULTIPLE TECHNOLOGIES WE CAN GET  THERE, MOST OF THEM ARE BACKED BY FIBERGLASS.

BY FIBER IN THE GROUND OR FIBER OVER AERIAL POLES.

AND YOU KNOW, WIRELESS IS ANOTHER OPTION FOR SOME  PLACES WHERE MAYBE IT'S TOO EXPENSIVE, AND THEN WE  TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT LOW-EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE.

THERE'S A SMATTERING OF WAYS TO DO THIS.

ALL OF THAT IS TO SAY THAT IF THERE WAS A REASON TO  HAVE BUILT IT ALREADY, IT WOULD ALREADY BE DONE.

IF THERE'S AN ECONOMIC REASON.

SO IN A LOT OF RURAL COMMUNITIES THAT WE STARTED  TO TALK ABOUT JUST A MINUTE AGO, WE HAVE A PROBLEM WHERE  THERE'S -- IT'S NOT ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR A  COMPANY TO OPERATE A NETWORK.

AND THAT'S WHERE THE GOVERNMENT GRANTS COME IN.

MAKING THAT BARRIER LESSENED FOR AN INTERNET SERVICE  PROVIDER TO COME IN AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE THAT  SERVICE.

THAT'S REALLY THE BIG ISSUE  HERE.

SO, WHILE ALBUQUERQUE OR  SANTA FE OR LAS CRUCES ARE RELATIVELY WELL TAKEN CARE  OF, AND AGAIN MAYBE A COUPLE OF SPOTS IN AND AROUND THOSE  AREAS THAT DO NOT HAVE SOME CONNECTIVITY OR MAYBE LOW  CONNECTIVITY, THERE ARE OTHER PLACES THAT JUST DON'T  HAVE CONNECTIVITY AT ALL, ESPECIALLY LIKE NAVAJO  NATION.

>> Lou: OKAY.

SO, FOR THOSE AREAS THAT ARE IN THESE RURAL -- IT SOUNDS  LIKE IT IS ABOUT MONEY.

IF WE'RE NOT GETTING THE  FEDERAL MONEY, OR THIS GRANT MONEY, AND THERE'S NO  ECONOMIC BENEFIT FOR COMPANIES TO COME THROUGH,  SO IS IT JUST -- HAVE WE JUST BEEN WAITING ON THESE  FEDERAL GRANT DOLLARS?

>> Lovelace: NO.

SOME OF IT IS GOING TO BE THE FEDERAL GRANT DOLLARS  FOR THOSE REAL RURAL COMMUNITIES.

BUT, I WILL ALSO ADD IN THAT THE PROCESS OF BUILDING  INFRASTRUCTURE TAKES YEARS.

RIGHTS OF WAY, PERMITS ARE  BARRIERS.

GETTING ACROSS FEDERAL LANDS  CAN BE CHALLENGING.

MAKING SURE THAT ONCE WE  ACTUALLY HAVE A LINE CONNECTED TO A HOME OR A  LINE CONNECTED TO A BUSINESS OR SCHOOL SOMEWHERE, MAKING  SURE THAT THEY HAVE DEVICES TO GET ON THE INTERNET.

IT'S NOT JUST THE CONNECTIVITY ISSUE, IT'S  ALSO ABOUT IS IT AFFORDABLE, IS THERE A DEVICE, CAN YOU  ACTUALLY USE IT.

>> Lou: OKAY.

NOW, 2021 CENSUS DATA SHOWS THAT MORE THAN 90% OF  AMERICANS HAVE BROADBAND SUBSCRIPTION.

HERE IN NEW MEXICO, WE'RE AT THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST  STATE-WISE.

A LITTLE BIT UNDER 85%.

WHAT DOES YOUR OFFICE CONSIDER AN ACCEPTABLE  PERCENTAGE FOR NEW MEXICO FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCESS,  OR DO YOU NOT THINK OF IT IN  THAT FRAMING?

>> Lovelace: YEAH, I WOULD  SAY THAT SOME OF THE CENSUS DATA GOES ON TO OLDER  DEFINITIONS FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

SO, KEEP IN MIND THAT BROADBAND SERVICE OR  HIGH-SPEED INTERNET WAS CONSIDERED 25 DOWNLOAD 3  UPLOAD DURING THAT LAST CENSUS, AND NOW THAT'S  CHANGED TO 100 DOWNLOAD, 20 UPLOAD.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE ACTUALLY THINK THAT NUMBER IS  PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT LOWER, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S BEEN  AVAILABLE AND WHAT'S PRETTY NEAT IS WE'VE ALREADY DONE A  COUPLE OF STATE-RUN GRANT PROGRAMS.

AND IN THE NEXT TWO YEARS WE'RE GOING TO START  CREEPING INTO THAT NUMBER.

WE THINK IN NUMBER OF  HOUSEHOLDS IN NEW MEXICO WE'RE DOING SOME FINAL WORK  ON THESE BIG FEDERAL GRANTS FOR THE BROADBAND EQUITY  ACCESS DEPLOYMENT, FUNDS THAT ARE COMING FROM  THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, WE THINK THAT NUMBER IS DOWN  TO IN THE 45,000 RANGE.

SO 45,000 HOUSEHOLDS ARE  UNSERVED.

>> Lou: OKAY.

TO START CHOPPING THROUGH THAT NUMBER, HOW LONG WILL  IT TAKE TO GET THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE THAT  YOU'VE TALKED ABOUT?

>> Lovelace: YEAH, IT'S  GOING TO BE ABOUT FIVE YEARS.

THE BROADBAND EQUITY ACCESS DEPLOYMENT FUNDS, WHICH  REALLY ARE TARGETING THE UNSERVED AS THE PRIORITY,  THE FOLKS WHO HAVE 25-3 OR LESS, OR MAYBE NO  CONNECTIVITY, THEY'RE GOING TO BE THE PRIORITY OUT OF  THAT PROGRAM.

AND THAT'S WHO WE HAVE TO GO  AFTER.

I WANT TO CAVEAT THIS IN  SAYING THERE ARE A COUPLE OF EXEMPTIONS IN THIS PROGRAM.

THERE ARE PLACES THAT ARE SO EXPENSIVE TO GET TO THAT IT  WOULD TAKE A MILLION DOLLARS, OR $500,000 JUST TO  GET TO A SINGLE BUILDING.

IN THAT THEY ACTUALLY CARVED  OUT A COUPLE OF WAYS.

IN OUR PROGRAM, WE'RE  ROLLING OUT -- WE'RE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT HOW TO  DO A BID FOR LOW-EARTH ORBIT SATELLITE FOR THOSE LAST  LOCATIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO HAVE SOME SORT OF  CONNECTIVITY.

>> Lou: OKAY.

NOW ONCE ALL THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN PLACE,  WHAT'S STOPPING A CORPORATE PROVIDER FROM COMING IN,  SNATCHING UP THOSE NETWORKS, AND TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE  PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN WAITING ON THIS SERVICE FOR SO LONG?

>> Lovelace: SO, THE WAY THE GRANTS ARE STRUCTURED IS  ACTUALLY TO HAVE THEM BID OUT.

SO, THERE WILL BE OPPORTUNITIES FOR COUNTIES,  CITIES, TRIBES, AND INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS TO BE ABLE  TO COME IN AND PROVIDE THAT SERVICE.

SO, THEY HAVE TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THAT NETWORK FOR  THE FEDERAL INTEREST PERIOD, WHICH IS ABOUT EIGHT YEARS.

THAT'S GOING TO BE AN IMPORTANT ONE.

BUT THERE IS NOTHING TO SAY THAT IF A COMPANY GOES OUT  OF BUSINESS THAT ANOTHER CORPORATION MAY COME IN AND  BUY THOSE ASSETS UP AND PROVIDE ASSETS.

WHAT IS INTERESTING IN THIS PROGRAM IS THAT FOR THOSE  WHO ARE NOT ABLE TO AFFORD THE INTERNET, THERE IS A CAP  AND A REQUIREMENT OF SPEED THAT'S PROVIDED, WHICH IS  THAT 100 DOWNLOAD, 20 UPLOAD.

AND FOR THOSE THAT QUALIFY, IT WOULD BE $50 A MONTH FOR  A LOW-COST OPTION.

>> Lou: ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, DREW LOVELACE.

THANKS FOR BEING HERE.

>> Lovelace: THANK YOU.

>> Jeff: THANKS FOR WATCHING, AND WE'LL SEE YOU  NEXT WEEK.

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